# Why all the cable haters?



## MatsudaMan

I find it really strange that on a forum that is dedicated to "Cables, Power, Tweaks, etc", there are so many people that are really not into tweaks, but rather into hating the tweaks and the people that have so much fun tweaking. For example, all the people out there that swear that there is no difference between speaker cables and interconnects, aren't you on the wrong forum? Hello, just have fun with your radioshack interconnects and leave us alone! This forum is really for people who can hear the difference and get much satisfaction from "Cables, Power, Tweaks, etc". As soon as someone posts a thread about a cable, you get swarms of responses by people who are not into tweaking and just rant about how cables don't do this and don't do that. "Oh, there's no difference between a hanger and such and such cable." "all interconnects sound the same." Uh, I like this forum because it has discussions about which cables are better, which power cords improve, how vibration isolation is good. Am I wrong or should I go somewhere else?


----------



## Jon118

You've probably just opened a huge can of worms, but basically those who see no difference between a coat hanger and an interconnect don't have anywhere to discuss why, not that there would be a point to that anyway, but still they discuss here since it is the only place and it is an open discussion. Plus the laws of physics do make some of the claims of cable makes seem rather dubious. Personally I don't go listening to coat hangers, but I don't buy $1,000 cables either. Both sides have their points and so long as this is the only place where this type of discussion is allowed it will continue here and will be generally unpleasant to read.


----------



## JohnFerrier

You are at the correct forum. There are many posts discussing the value of cables and tweaks. I expect future posts to further clarify the benefits of cables and tweaks. We're bound to get to the bottom of this eventually.

 .


----------



## vcoheda

they claim to be saving the children.


----------



## Spiritboxer

Probably the same reason people hate and fear snakes....


----------



## markl

Quote:


 I find it really strange that on a forum that is dedicated to "Cables, Power, Tweaks, etc", there are so many people that are really not into tweaks, but rather into hating the tweaks and the people that have so much fun tweaking. For example, all the people out there that swear that there is no difference between speaker cables and interconnects, aren't you on the wrong forum? 
 

 LOL, you must be new here. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 It wasn't always this way; this forum has totally degenerated over the last 3 years. 

 The reasons are manifold:

*-----------WARNING, OFFENSIVE & INCONVENIENT FACTUAL OBSERVATIONS AHEAD--------*

 1. Most head-fiers are young and new to audio (not all, but let's say 70%+). So they also usually lack the kinds of systems capable of allowing them to hear differences in cables.

 2. Upon arrival here, they've just been told they need headphones they can barely afford, amps and better sources they can't, and now cables. Cables! That's the final straw! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	







 I reject your voodoo cables! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I reject things that I can't afford! (Natural human reaction.)

 3. You need developed ears and experience comparing lots of gear before things at the level of cables become clearly audible to you. Again, the crowd here is mostly younger and so often struggle to tell the difference between amps, let alone cables.

 4. The level of expectation for what kind of difference a cable can make is all wrong. They seem to be expecting some earth-shattering complete re-imagining of the sonics, but that's not what you get. They will not accept that the difference is much less than that, and likely falls outside the level at which they are currently capable of perceiving. 

 5. Inexperienced people pick the over-tweaked hyper-bright TV screen on the shop floor ("oooh, look at that!), the "louder" and bass-heavy pumping speaker in the wall of speakers at the Best Buy. That doesn't mean they are better devices or perform better at all, but at the level of their perception abilities, only differences that strong and glaring are perceived, and usually deemed "superior" even though they are not. When an audio cable does not "pop" like the loudest, most obnoxious speaker in the shop, they can't hear it and so think it's bunk.

 6. Young people (in general) do not just sit and listen to music (especially nowadays), doing nothing else. They're busy multi-tasking, and music is in the background of whatever else they are involved in. Of course, under these circumstances, how are they ever going to hear mere cable differences?

 7. They're in college and going through that de-programming process where everything they learned in school so far turns out to be mostly over-simplified pap. They are in that stage where they want to reject everything with a skeptic's eye. They're so disillusioned, they need *proof* of everything. They also think they know it all, and anything someone over 30 says is true must be a lie. I can say this because I went through it too, and so did everyone else. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I could go on, but I'll stop there.


----------



## dazzer1975

That post ^ has to be illustrative of the reasons why there is such animosity when dicussing cables.

 I am a cable beleiver (to a point and from what I have heard) but seriously, thats utter **** what you've just waffled mate.


----------



## Bizzel

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *dazzer1975* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_That post ^ has to be illustrative of the reasons why there is such animosity when dicussing cables.

 I am a cable beleiver (to a point and from what I have heard) but seriously, thats utter **** what you've just waffled mate._

 

I thought it was pretty coherent myself. When it comes to cables, I'm boring. Boring because I sit happily in-between the two camps. I believe I've heard cables make a noticeable difference but, at the same time, I'm willing to believe that's just placebo. If someone doesn't believe cables make a difference, they should at least try them first hand before stating it as fact.


----------



## dazzer1975

coherent?

 if you don't believe in cables it is because you are young and poor and you can't hear what cables bring to the table, and if you cant hear what cables bring to the table then your young and poor and therefore dont believe in cables.

 Yeah, really coherent argument that.


----------



## rustbucket

The forum is actually 'Cables, Power, Tweaks, Speakers, Accessories'

 The non-believers may be here for one of the other topics in this forum. Or they may just like to start trouble. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I don't really have strong feelings either way about cables; I mostly visit for the speaker discussions/advice. But people (including me) love drama, so we all click on these threads that we know are going to go up like a hand grenade. It's the same reason people watch reality TV. 

 Anyways I got nothin but love for all of you on both sides of the fence.


----------



## markl

We could spend all day avoiding the facts, but sometimes a dose of truth is needed to clear the air. Let's look at the typical "hater" and evaluate why they might feel like they do, based on who they are. Cable "haters" are allowed free reign to call "believers" all kinds of names and question their sanity, call them shills, etc. etc. But the actual facts about many (not all) of the demographic that hate cables are off limits?

 Nothing I said should be offensive (though I know it will be read that way). I haven't called anyone a name. All I've done is collect a list of factual observations about the "typical" "hater" (not all of them, just most). 

 What, specifically, is offensive or untrue? 

 --I wasn't rich in college and couldn't afford lots of great stuff either, that's a fact.

 --When I was 18, I had A LOT less experience listening to different gear, that is a fact.

 --When I was 18, I would have been hard-pressed to hear the difference between cables, especially on the gear I had which was hardly what it is today. Facts.

 --When I was 18, I (and everyone else I knew) thought I knew it all and was a skeptic of everything, too. But I passed out of this phase. Fact.

 --Inexperienced ears pick the louder or sharper or more aggressive piece of audio and label it "better" because it is finally at a level they can recognize as "different" from the others. Fact. Does that make it "better"? No, definitely not. But inexperienced ears can't discern that at first. Do cables operate at that kind of level of difference so as to be easily spotted by anyone? No. Fact.

 --I am a better listener today than I was yesterday, and will be better still tomorrow. Fact. So will all the cable "haters".

 --I know less experienced people don't like being told they aren't as good at something as experienced people, but that's their problem. I've never ridden a skateboard, so it's my problem if I get offended when Tony Hawk tells me he can do tricks I can't. He's right. That's life.


----------



## rustbucket

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *dazzer1975* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_coherent?

 if your young and poor you can't hear what cables bring to the table, and if you cant hear what cables bring to the table the your young and poor.

 Yeah, really coherent argument that._

 

Oof - all us poor, uneducated, ADD-ridden youngin's that don't have the patience, experience or money(?!!?) to appreciate the subtleties of being an audiophile just took a hit to our image. 'Your' is possessive - it's your grammar in question. 'You're' is probably the word you were looking for.

 (No hard feelings Dazzer - I knew that log was gonna get thrown on the fire, and I just couldn't resist doing it myself)


----------



## 3x331m

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Spiritboxer* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Probably the same reason people hate and fear snakes...._

 

I don't hate and fear snakes. I kill them for oil. Snake oil is in high demand. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I do wish I have funding for some high quality cables. However, there are some made of snake oil, too.


----------



## Pangaea

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rustbucket* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Oof - all us poor, uneducated, ADD-ridden youngin's that don't have the patience, experience or money(?!!?) to appreciate the subtleties of being an audiophile just took a hit to our image. 'Your' is possessive - it's your grammar in question. 'You're' is probably the word you were looking for.

 (No hard feelings Dazzer - I knew that log was gonna get thrown on the fire, and I just couldn't resist doing it myself)_

 

Hey- spell check is free...


----------



## dazzer1975

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rustbucket* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Oof - all us poor, uneducated, ADD-ridden youngin's that don't have the patience, experience or money(?!!?) to appreciate the subtleties of being an audiophile just took a hit to our image. 'Your' is possessive - it's your grammar in question. 'You're' is probably the word you were looking for.

 (No hard feelings Dazzer - I knew that log was gonna get thrown on the fire, and I just couldn't resist doing it myself)_

 


 Pedantry is the last preserve of those anal retentive types who care just that little too much about how they are perceived.

 You do not need to teach me about grammar. What you may have something to teach me about perhaps, is the mind set that deems it a worthwhile cause proof reading a post on a forum.

 If I told you my I.Q. you would feel a little foolish I feel.


----------



## rustbucket

Ahhh the great irony of the audiophile. By the time you're old enough to really appreciate the subtleties that can be bought for princely sums, your hearing is going out!


----------



## Currawong

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *markl* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_LOL, you must be new here. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 It wasn't always this way; this forum has totally degenerated over the last 3 years. 

 The reasons are manifold:

*-----------WARNING, OFFENSIVE & INCONVENIENT FACTUAL OBSERVATIONS AHEAD--------*

 1. Most head-fiers are young and new to audio (not all, but let's say 70%+). So they also usually lack the kinds of systems capable of allowing them to hear differences in cables.

 2. Upon arrival here, they've just been told they need headphones they can barely afford, amps and better sources they can't, and now cables. Cables! That's the final straw! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	







 I reject your voodoo cables! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I reject things that I can't afford! (Natural human reaction.)

 3. You need developed ears and experience comparing lots of gear before things at the level of cables become clearly audible to you. Again, the crowd here is mostly younger and so often struggle to tell the difference between amps, let alone cables.

 4. The level of expectation for what kind of difference a cable can make is all wrong. They seem to be expecting some earth-shattering complete re-imagining of the sonics, but that's not what you get. They will not accept that the difference is much less than that, and likely falls outside the level at which they are currently capable of perceiving. 

 5. Inexperienced people pick the over-tweaked hyper-bright TV screen on the shop floor ("oooh, look at that!), the "louder" and bass-heavy pumping speaker in the wall of speakers at the Best Buy. That doesn't mean they are better devices or perform better at all, but at the level of their perception abilities, only differences that strong and glaring are perceived, and usually deemed "superior" even though they are not. When an audio cable does not "pop" like the loudest, most obnoxious speaker in the shop, they can't hear it and so think it's bunk.

 6. Young people (in general) do not just sit and listen to music (especially nowadays), doing nothing else. They're busy multi-tasking, and music is in the background of whatever else they are involved in. Of course, under these circumstances, how are they ever going to hear mere cable differences?

 7. They're in college and going through that de-programming process where everything they learned in school so far turns out to be mostly over-simplified pap. They are in that stage where they want to reject everything with a skeptic's eye. They're so disillusioned, they need *proof* of everything. They also think they know it all, and anything someone over 30 says is true must be a lie. I can say this because I went through it too, and so did everyone else. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I could go on, but I'll stop there. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

I'll go on...

 There are also a bunch of well-known large cable companies who's business relies on snake oil. Someone will bring a pair of blue jeans or radio shack cable around to the house of someone who owns a $20k pair of snake-oil cable and no difference will be heard, so a bunch of people conclude that ALL cables are snake oil.

 It's a problem of people wanting black and white, when it isn't that simple. It's not more complex than needing a good overall system to start with for the differences to be noticeable, when using a non-snake-oil brand.

 That being said, most people just need BJ's.


----------



## MatsudaMan

Quote:


 LOL, you must be new here.

 It wasn't always this way; this forum has totally degenerated over the last 3 years.

 The reasons are manifold:

 -----------WARNING, OFFENSIVE & INCONVENIENT FACTUAL OBSERVATIONS AHEAD--------

 1. Most head-fiers are young and new to audio (not all, but let's say 70%+). So they also usually lack the kinds of systems capable of allowing them to hear differences in cables.

 2. Upon arrival here, they've just been told they need headphones they can barely afford, amps and better sources they can't, and now cables. Cables! That's the final straw! I reject your voodoo cables! I reject things that I can't afford! (Natural human reaction.)

 3. You need developed ears and experience comparing lots of gear before things at the level of cables become clearly audible to you. Again, the crowd here is mostly younger and so often struggle to tell the difference between amps, let alone cables.

 4. The level of expectation for what kind of difference a cable can make is all wrong. They seem to be expecting some earth-shattering complete re-imagining of the sonics, but that's not what you get. They will not accept that the difference is much less than that, and likely falls outside the level at which they are currently capable of perceiving.

 5. Inexperienced people pick the over-tweaked hyper-bright TV screen on the shop floor ("oooh, look at that!), the "louder" and bass-heavy pumping speaker in the wall of speakers at the Best Buy. That doesn't mean they are better devices or perform better at all, but at the level of their perception abilities, only differences that strong and glaring are perceived, and usually deemed "superior" even though they are not. When an audio cable does not "pop" like the loudest, most obnoxious speaker in the shop, they can't hear it and so think it's bunk.

 6. Young people (in general) do not just sit and listen to music (especially nowadays), doing nothing else. They're busy multi-tasking, and music is in the background of whatever else they are involved in. Of course, under these circumstances, how are they ever going to hear mere cable differences?

 7. They're in college and going through that de-programming process where everything they learned in school so far turns out to be mostly over-simplified pap. They are in that stage where they want to reject everything with a skeptic's eye. They're so disillusioned, they need *proof* of everything. They also think they know it all, and anything someone over 30 says is true must be a lie. I can say this because I went through it too, and so did everyone else.

 I could go on, but I'll stop there. 
 

Wow, I totally agree with you. Markl, I like your style man.


----------



## rustbucket

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Currawong* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I'll go on...

 That being said, most people just need BJ's._

 

I really don't know how to respond to that...


----------



## Bizzel

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *dazzer1975* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_If I told you my I.Q. you would feel a little foolish I feel._

 

We are all humbled by your presence and unquestioningly defer to your superior intellect.


----------



## markl

Quote:


 I'll go on...

 There are also a bunch of well-known large cable companies who's business relies on snake oil. Someone will bring a pair of blue jeans or radio shack cable around to the house of someone who owns a $20k pair of snake-oil cable and no difference will be heard, so a bunch of people conclude that ALL cables are snake oil.

 It's a problem of people wanting black and white, when it isn't that simple. It's not more complex than needing a good overall system to start with for the differences to be noticeable, when using a non-snake-oil brand.

 That being said, most people just need BJ's.
 __________________ 
 

LOL, yes, we could all use a few extra BJs, you got me there. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Stepping back a bit, don't you see the irony in championing Blue Jeans cable? If a cable is a cable is a cable, then why do you need to spend $75 on BJ cables when you have free stock ones? Your position is not consistent my friend.

 If you assert that Blue Jeans is "better" than a stock cable, then you admit there is a continuum between audio cables that range from poor, to outstanding. In your case, after listening to one aftermarket cable, in this case Blue Jeans (which conveniently happens to be affordable), you've concluded that this must be the end of the line and you've reached "outstanding" magically on your first try out of the chute.

 I suggest you try a bunch more cables before determining that Blue Jeans is THE ULTIMATE.

 Yes, there are a lot of under-performing cables out there at all different price points. Not every dollar you spend results in better sound. There are plenty of $100 cables that will sound better than some $1000 cables.

 But BJC is surely not the end of the line, my firend.


----------



## dazzer1975

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *markl* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_We could spend all day avoiding the facts, but sometimes a dose of truth is needed to clear the air._

 

there were no facts offered in your post, to illustrate this point you statrted it by including the oxymoron "factual observations".

 Now, in so far as they were you're (happy now rust?) observations, that is a fact, but to imbue them with some kind of empirically derived scientific evidence to increase their weighting as fact is a step too far. What they are, is nothing more than anecdotal observations.

  Quote:


 Let's look at the typical "hater" and evaluate why they might feel like they do, based on who they are. 
 

First, I fear you wold be evaluatig YOU'RE perceptions of what they MIGHT feel like and WHO they are.

 Lets get these "haters" (hardly unemotive calm factual presentation here is it?) and ask them specifically who they are and what they feel abut cables.

  Quote:


 Cable "haters" are allowed free reign to call "believers" all kinds of names and question their sanity, call them shills, etc. etc. But the actual facts about many (not all) of the demographic that hate cables are off limits? 
 

So you reply in kind, good tactic.

  Quote:


 Nothing I said should be offensive (though I know it will be read that way). I haven't called anyone a name. All I've done is collect a list of factual observations about the "typical" "hater" (not all of them, just most). 
 

What you have done is come up with some lazy self perceived possible explanation for why people shold not agree with you about discounting the effect that cables can have on a system.


  Quote:


 What, specifically, is offensive or untrue? 

 --I wasn't rich in college and couldn't afford lots of great stuff either, that's a fact.

 --When I was 18, I had A LOT less experience listening to different gear, that is a fact.

 --When I was 18, I would have been hard-pressed to hear the difference between cables, especially on the gear I had which was hardly what it is today. Facts.

 --When I was 18, I (and everyone else I knew) thought I knew it all and was a skeptic of everything, too. But I passed out of this phase. Fact.

 --Inexperienced ears pick the louder or sharper or more aggressive piece of audio and label it "better" because it is finally at a level they can recognize as "different" from the others. Fact. Does that make it "better"? No, definitely not. But inexperienced ears can't discern that at first. Do cables operate at that kind of level of difference so as to be easily spotted by anyone? No. Fact.

 --I am a better listener today than I was yesterday, and will be better still tomorrow. Fact. So will all the cable "haters".

 --I know less experienced people don't like being told they aren't as good at something as experienced people, but that's their problem. I've never ridden a skateboard, so it's my problem if I get offended when Tony Hawk tells me he can do tricks I can't. He's right. That's life. 
 

Wow, you've (can't forget the apostrophe) really done some work there, you have taken your own experiences and projected them onto EVERYONE else who is in disagreement with you about cables and written their experiences off as a result of naivety and poverty.

 For what it is worth, and I said this in my first post, I am a cable believer, I am new to seeking out better sound quality, I have what is relatively crap gear, I can tell the difference between interconnects, namely copper and silver coated copper, not even pure silver ic's.

 I think your "argument" isn't so much an argument, as it is a bitter polemic.

 And as I said, it is illustrative of why these threads garner such animosity, as has been witnessed already in this one.

 It is easy to argue like this but to present you case ina reasoned and rational way using evidence and objective language takes a littl more time and thought, and ultimately, would probably lead to less arguments, more ejoyable discussion and more discoveries for everyone.


----------



## gotchaforce

Tweaks and cables are jokes of the audio industry, they have laughable amounts of research and development yet they charge huge amounts of money.

 Basically almost every cable and tweak company out there is worse than Bose, because at least Bose has research and development and probably less of a mark up.

 Seriously $80 for cd cleaning fluid, $100 for steel spikes on the bottom of your cd player, $400 for a device that cuts your cds so they "sound better", $150 for a power cable from virtual dynamics that has $40 worth of parts and is manufactured crappily, $2000 for a platinum teaspoon on top of a wooden block (acoustic resonators), $1000 CD demagnetizers, these products are all a joke and some could easily be labeled as scams. These do no favor to the image of audiophiles from the outside world.


----------



## MatsudaMan

Why are you guys even on a tweak forum if you're not about tweaks! This site is full of people who must not have very good equipment. If you have really good equipment you aren't going to use crappy cable. If you have crappy cable, you probably have crap equipment and get all pissed off when people say that cables make a difference. You can't tell because your equipment is crap. Oh yeah, and your ears are not refined. You don't need to tweak anything because you're not detail oriented, which is fine, because you don't notice when things are better or worse in a subtle way. Good for you. You don't have to buy good cables or other tweaks. Just go home and enjoy your Radio Shack cables and enjoy the music.


----------



## rustbucket

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *MatsudaMan* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Why are you guys even on a tweak forum if you're not about tweaks! This site is full of people who must not have very good equipment. If you have really good equipment you aren't going to use crappy cable. If you have crappy cable, you probably have crap equipment and get all pissed off when people say that cables make a difference. You can't tell because your equipment is crap._

 

This isn't just the tweak forum, homes


----------



## skullguise

Many industries have their "special" high end categories, and audio is just one. 

 My wife bought a pair of shoes recently, regularly over $400! She got a great deal, but they have less material, and seem no better made, than a decent $40 pair of shoes she bought another time (both made with lots of soft leather).

 For audio, tweaks and cables are all over the place, in regards to price and functionality. One of the things mentioned above was the "cutting system." I have heard this, and it made a difference, in a positive way, for 5 CD's on which my dealer used it. I am still considering buying a used one (don't want to buy new, not THAT worth it to me).

 I have heard differences in cables, and sometimes they are so subtle that I question if it is really there or my imagination. Other times, it is a very discernable difference.

 I haven't studied the demographics of those posting, so I can't add an educated opinion to Mark's observations. But I have read Mark's write-ups and reviews, and hold his opinions on audio in very high regards (especially because many of them are similar to mine 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




).

 In MY opinion, cables can and do make a difference - sometimes not for the better. Aside from construction, there's system interaction. In my systems, I have found certain cables do better than others. Spending an enormous sum on cables is LONG behind me, though, as a whole new wave of great DIY and one-step-above-DIY cables have come along to give the bigger companies a run for their money.

 Companies like BJC help people get into good quality sound at a decent price. I have owned their products, and yet I have heard better. I was willing to pay a certain amount extra to get the better sound in my system. I won't go beyond a certain point anymore, though, as returns on investment diminish greatly IMO.

 People get pretty vehement on both sides of the matter. Are there snake oil companies out there? Sure, and in MANY industries. Are there also companies that make a very expensive but very nice cable? Sure. I've heard Nordost and Kubala-Sosna in a couple systems, and they were truly awesome. I'll never buy them, though.

 I think the market will ultimately decide who wins and loses. It's not up to us to be the pro- and anti- cable police.... We should be able to express our opinions AS OPINIONS (yes, with all due respect, Mark, you too; though you speak from greater expeirence, so to me your opinions MEAN more), and I think the arguments would minimize.

 My long-winded two cents....sorry for any spelling errors


----------



## MatsudaMan

There should be a cable lover's forum. No haters allowed. Let's do it. Cable lovers unite!! In the cable lover's forum you could ask someone, "What cable would mate well with such and such equipment", and you wouldn't get responses like, "my coat hangar sounds better". It would be awesome.


----------



## JadeEast

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *MatsudaMan* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Why are you guys even on a tweak forum if you're not about tweaks! This site is full of people who must not have very good equipment. If you have really good equipment you aren't going to use crappy cable. If you have crappy cable, you probably have crap equipment and get all pissed off when people say that cables make a difference. You can't tell because your equipment is crap._

 

I really shouldn't post and add to this mess of a forum but it's really difficult to believe that you have any intention of a serious dialogue with anyone when you add a post like this to the conversation. You are simply feeding the fire of division and irrationality on the subject. Don't go attacking people in broad-strokes and expect that they will not do the same to you. You sound like you're trolling to me. 

 If you really care about the quality of information on this sub forum then post good information and not simple flame bait.


----------



## sejarzo

MatsudaMan, you are painting with too broad a brush there......

 At the last Chicago meet, a fellow head-fier brought a Cambridge Azur 840C with a GSX along with his recabled balanced K701's, K340's, and some Beyers. He uses BJC cables. He also uses BJC in his home theater/speaker rig.

 I run a Marantz SA8001, Mister-X CKKIII, and HD600's.......and I use BJC's, because I've tried Kimbers and others, and well, there was just no difference. My speaker/HT rig is cabled with BJC, too.

 Do both of us simply have crap equipment?


----------



## Drag0n

Youngins arent the only ones that dont believe in cables. The geezers at Stereophile Magazine and other highend mags also argue the point between themselves. I believe Julian Hirsh was a disbeliever in cable voodoo himself, and he was old and i think he died with the belief. 
 So now that theyre disbelievers, they get to go to low-end hell and listen to low rez mp3's out of ipod ear buds for all eternity when they die.


----------



## markl

Quote:


 there were no facts offered in your post, to illustrate this point you statrted it by including the oxymoron "factual observations". 
 

 So, how do you perceive a fact, if not by observation? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			








  Quote:


 Now, in so far as they were you're (happy now rust?) observations, that is a fact, but to imbue them with some kind of empirically derived scientific evidence to increase their weighting as fact is a step too far. What they are, is nothing more than anecdotal observations. 
 

 Interesting, so, you've never read the results of a single one of the multiple polls taken over time of the ages Head-fiers? If you had, or you spent even a cursory amount of time here, you'd see pretty quick this forum is not full of AARP members.

  Quote:


 Lets get these "haters" (hardly unemotive calm factual presentation here is it?) 
 

 Did you read the thread title? Who are we discussing here? Do you not see the quotation marks? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	







 You're taking this far too personally.


  Quote:


 So you reply in kind, good tactic. 
 

 Within this thread, I've done nothing but list some facts. However, in other threads, yes, you bet your life I now reply in kind. If they won't behave, I see no reason to be held to any higher standard. You also must be new here, or you would know that any semblance of civil discussion on these matters has been jettisoned long ago. We've all seen enough of the "haters" (quote unquote) to know where they are really coming from, so calling them on their BS is hardly off-limits.

  Quote:


 What you have done is come up with some lazy self perceived possible explanation for why people shold not agree with you about discounting the effect that cables can have on a system. 
 

 Er, no, what I've done is taken my encyclopedic knowledge of this site, obtained from being here since day one and before on headwize, reading posts here every day, to get a completely solid lay of the land. I know what this site is, who it is chiefly made up of, and have been through thousands of threads on this very topic arguing with these very people that I know them like the back of my hand. Again, if you have evidence that my generalizations about most (again, NOT ALL) so-called (is that clearer for you) "haters" is inacurate, please present it.

  Quote:


 you have taken your own experiences and projected them onto EVERYONE else who is in disagreement with you about cables and written their experiences off as a result of naivety and poverty. 
 

 No, I am showing that I am not above the criticism I lobbed at the non-believers, coming at this from some ivory tower. I am showing you that I am not gifted with "magic ears". I am telling you that I, too, once thought and behaved and had systems and levels of experience just like many of the "haters", but through *experience*, I now have actual knowledge on which to base my opinions. I am showing you that this is largely a phase you will pass through if you decide to stick with this hobby long enough.

 Bye.


----------



## kool bubba ice

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *MatsudaMan* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I find it really strange that on a forum that is dedicated to "Cables, Power, Tweaks, etc", there are so many people that are really not into tweaks, but rather into hating the tweaks and the people that have so much fun tweaking. For example, all the people out there that swear that there is no difference between speaker cables and interconnects, aren't you on the wrong forum? Hello, just have fun with your radioshack interconnects and leave us alone! This forum is really for people who can hear the difference and get much satisfaction from "Cables, Power, Tweaks, etc". As soon as someone posts a thread about a cable, you get swarms of responses by people who are not into tweaking and just rant about how cables don't do this and don't do that. "Oh, there's no difference between a hanger and such and such cable." "all interconnects sound the same." Uh, I like this forum because it has discussions about which cables are better, which power cords improve, how vibration isolation is good. Am I wrong or should I go somewhere else?_

 

They are trolls & have nothing better to do.. I don't see believers cramming down their point of view that theres a audio difference.. & the majority of trolls like to call names if you don't agree with them.. Troll is appropriate for this case..


----------



## markl

Quote:


 Youngins arent the only ones that dont believe in cables. 
 

 Absolutely 100% true. I am speaking in generalizations that cover AT LEAST (being cautious) 70% of so-called "haters" on this site.

 Now for the fully grown adults with years of listening experience and plenty good systems, for you guys who still can't hear a difference, I just don't know what your excuse is.


----------



## dazzer1975

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *markl* 
_
 No, I am showing that I am not above the criticism I lobbed at the non-believers, coming at this from some ivory tower. I am showing you that I am not gifted with "magic ears". I am telling you that I, too, once thought and behaved and had systems and levels of experience just like many of the "haters", but through *experience*, I now have actual knowledge on which to base my opinions. I am showing you that this is largely a phase you will pass through if you decide to stick with this hobby long enough.

 Bye. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

I am saying that the underlying premise of your polemic is not based on fact.

 As explained, I have relatively crappy equipment, and am new to seeking out a better audio experience.

 I can hear the difference in interconnect cables, you do not need high end equipment and a few years experience to discern the differences in cable.

 By using the "arguments and generalisations" you have done, you have done nothing for the discussion in any meaningful way aside from perpetuate some tired baseless notions revolving around the attempt to discredit and dismiss those who do not share your viewpoint.

 I believe in cables, would I try to prove that cables make a difference by suggesting that those who don't agree are poor, young and naive? No way, as it would self evidently be ludicrous to attempt to argue any kind of point from that stance, at least, with any inherent credibility.


----------



## kool bubba ice

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *markl* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Absolutely 100% true. I am speaking in generalizations that cover AT LEAST (being cautious) 70% of so-called "haters" on this site.

 Now for the fully grown adults with years of listening experience and plenty good systems, for you guys who still can't hear a difference, I just don't know what your excuse is. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	








_

 

I like the, prove me theres a difference crowd.. Everything can't be defined by science & engineering.. Prove love is real.. Where is it..Can I put it under a microscope to study it.. If not, it's not real.. Getting butter flies in one's stomach when seeing a boy/girl you like must be the placebo effect. If people think they hear a difference, whether they do or not doesn't effect the non believers in any way...


----------



## FooTemps

After reading through a few comments... I have have to say this...

 I PROPOSE A DOUBLE BLIND TEST!
 (please don't ban me)

 okay now for a serious comment:
 I hate cables and the drama they bring! There's always "this one is better" or "that one killed my sister" or "this one is gray because the black one and white one had illicit socially unacceptable activity".

 Fine fine, real comment this time:
 I believe that to a degree cables will be helpful. The physical properties of the cable may allow the cable to carry signal further with less distortion. There may also be physical properties that colorize sound, but there is only so far of an extent you can go. I've heard/experienced the differences between cables, but the differences only come with huge changes like silver to copper (with different shielding/braiding/gage). Change one thing and it's mental, change enough real physical properties and it leaves a real world effect. That just makes common sense and should make sense when it comes down the physical composition of the wires (blah blah blah physics).


----------



## sejarzo

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *markl* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_.....Now for the fully grown adults with years of listening experience and plenty good systems, for you guys who still can't hear a difference, I just don't know what your excuse is._

 

I'm an engineer--not in the electronic realm--but here is my take on "our excuse", coming from the technical/scientific side of things.....

 It's that we have to be able to quantify differences, theorize a cause, and test that theory in order to increase understanding and make real improvements to any physical/mechanical/chemical/electrical systems that are our livelihood. We jut are never allowed in our business to say "Gee, What, this new widget is better, and I have no idea why--but we're going to make all widgets this way from now on!" That just doesn't fly in reality.

 So often, "tweak lovers" take the attitude that the reason the tweak is better simply could never be measured or quantified, and engineers simply don't rely on mystery. If we did, we'd all be listening to wax cylinders at best--our "method" is essential to the fundamental development of the devices that you need to listen to hi-fi in the first place.

 The problem I find is that there are a plethora of theories, often diametrically opposed to each other, to explain why "our cable design is superior to Brand X" (think Kimber--twisted pair, unshielded versus BJC--coax, shielded.) Both of the claims cannot be correct, if indeed one is better, isn't that so? That means that a lot of the claims out there are fundamentally wrong.

 The differences between tubes and transistors are measurable and explainable, the differences between types of transistors are measurable and explainable, the differences between caps, etc. etc.......so by nature, we are very skeptical that cables can make a major difference, when all we know to measure shows that there is no major difference.


----------



## sejarzo

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *kool bubba ice* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I like the, prove me theres a difference crowd.. Everything can't be defined by science & engineering.. Prove love is real.. Where is it..Can I put it under a microscope to study it.. If not, it's not real.. Getting butter flies in one's stomach when seeing a boy/girl you like must be the placebo effect. If people think they hear a difference, whether they do or not doesn't effect the non believers in any way..._

 

But if there is a consistent sonic difference, that means the physical system that is creating the music is doing something different. It's not an emotional issue--and no engineers would claim that love doesn't exist because it's not quantifiable. What you propose is simply not an appropriate analogy. Love and emotions exist in the mind--true differences in sound result from physical differences, they are not simply in the mind.


----------



## FooTemps

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *sejarzo* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I'm an engineer--not in the electronic realm--but here is my take on "our excuse", coming from the technical/scientific side of things.....

 It's that we have to be able to quantify differences, theorize a cause, and test that theory in order to increase understanding and make real improvements to any physical/mechanical/chemical/electrical systems that are our livelihood. We jut are never allowed in our business to say "Gee, What, this new widget is better, and I have no idea why--but we're going to make all widgets this way from now on!" That just doesn't fly in reality.

 So often, "tweak lovers" take the attitude that the reason the tweak is better simply could never be measured or quantified, and engineers simply don't rely on mystery. If we did, we'd all be listening to wax cylinders at best--our "method" is essential to the fundamental development of the devices that you need to listen to hi-fi in the first place.

 The problem I find is that there are a plethora of theories, often diametrically opposed to each other, to explain why "our cable design is superior to Brand X" (think Kimber--twisted pair, unshielded versus BJC--coax, shielded.) Both of the claims cannot be correct, if indeed one is better, isn't that so? That means that a lot of the claims out there are fundamentally wrong.

 The differences between tubes and transistors are measurable and explainable, the differences between types of transistors are measurable and explainable, the differences between caps, etc. etc.......so by nature, we are very skeptical that cables can make a major difference, when all we know to measure shows that there is no major difference._

 

Well you're an engineer so you should understand that the scale of the units of measurement really determines the degree of difference we could perceive in cables. I believe that different methods of cabling can achieve high levels of performance (look at all the form factors of combustion engines). I just think that since what we're looking at is...
 a) unimportant in the wider scope of things
 b) at too much of a micro scale for us to really comprehend/measure with current technology
 no one will really bother to rig up a scientifically sound way to measure the difference in signal carrying properties in cables.

 Science can only go so far as our understanding, until then we have faith. I believe that there may be a chance of differences in cables since I have perceived different sounds with from different cables. But then again, I may just be crazy/placebo/religious nut(yes, I consider blind cable believers religious nuts)

 edit: Also, by high performance... I mean relative to the scope of impact a cable has on performance.


----------



## markl

Quote:


 The differences between tubes and transistors are measurable and explainable, the differences between types of transistors are measurable and explainable, the differences between caps, etc. etc.......so by nature, we are very skeptical that cables can make a major difference, when all we know to measure shows that there is no major difference. 
 

 In the days before the invention of the thermometer, we would be having an argument about how I could claim "gee, it's getting colder outside". Oh yeah, prove it! says ye. Look at the snow falling, says I.

 There hasn't been some Manhattan Project with billions dedicated to unravelling the mysteries of the audio cable.

 Still, there are things we can measure about cables- inductance, capacitance, impedence and so on. We can, in fact, right now show that a cable is not a cable is not a cable (though "haters" still deny this is so). However, I would still say that even these primitive measurements don't tell the whole story.

 My father is an engineer. I am half engineer by birth. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I work in fields dominated by engineers. I love me some engineers, they are among the last honest and reliable people on planet earth. But they don't know everything. They only know what their current state of the art machines that go ping tell them. Outside of that, they don't want to know. I can respect and understand that.


----------



## sejarzo

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *markl* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_ They only know what their current state of the art machines that go ping tell them. *Outside of that, they don't want to know.* I can respect and understand that._

 

The broad brush strikes again, sigh.........that's a truly preposterous statement. And it's exactly the sort of statement that causes those who have to work to find logical explanations for physical phenomena to disrespect the "I hear it, so it is true for me" crowd.


----------



## Luminette

I'm 21, and I plainly think markl is the defender of truth and coolness on this thread 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Excellent points in his original post, and, it's a shame he didn't go on an elaborate rant of the easy provocation of the youngins (which I consider myself to be a part of, if at the older heights of it)

 Perhaps that would have played on the very same rebellion concept and kept them quiet, just to show us all ;]

 A+ Markl, and the OP! Agreed!


----------



## markl

Quote:


 The broad brush strikes again, sigh.........that's a truly preposterous statement. And it's exactly the sort of statement that causes those who have to work to find logical explanations for physical phenomena to disrespect the "I hear it, so it is true for me" crowd. 
 

Ah, great, so you won't turn around and command me to show you which machine *proves* a difference between cables? Oh wait, you will.... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 So your mind is open, and you don't mock people who hear a difference between cables? You have never demanded double-blind testing results for cable claims on this site? 

 Should one bother to go back and sift through your posts to verify?

 Maybe you have, but color me skeptical.


----------



## Currawong

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *markl* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_LOL, yes, we could all use a few extra BJs, you got me there. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Stepping back a bit, don't you see the irony in championing Blue Jeans cable? If a cable is a cable is a cable, then why do you need to spend $75 on BJ cables when you have free stock ones? Your position is not consistent my friend._

 

Umm...I'm not championing them. What I'm saying is, _most_ people just need some basically decently made cable.

 I wont reply to the rest of your post as none of it describes anything like what I said. I don't actually own any BJ cables. Actually, it's funny, in my sig I have expensively re-cabled AKG 701's, mention Van Den Hul as well, and someone thinks I'm championing Blue Jeans? How far can you miss-read someone's post? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 What I'm saying, if it wasn't already clear is, it's not black and white. Choosing good cables - no wait! Choosing _any component_ has to be appropriate for the overall system. Cables are just another component in the signal path. That's too obvious for many people though.


----------



## dazzer1975

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *sejarzo* 
_The broad brush strikes again, sigh.........that's a truly preposterous statement. And it's exactly the sort of statement that causes those who have to work to find logical explanations for physical phenomena to disrespect the "I hear it, so it is true for me" crowd._

 

Precisely my point, yet he seems unable to recognise how it actually detracts from his position and removes any credibility to his argument.

 To put forward your position with weight and credibility, if there is inherent weight and credibility in your position, it should not be necessary to attack the oposition.


----------



## Luminette

Sounds like desperation-driven obscure semantics to me, reminiscent of quotations of famed but sub-par thinkers of the 19th century

 Maybe I just need a BJ.


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *markl* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_1. Most head-fiers are young and new to audio (not all, but let's say 70%+). So they also usually lack the kinds of systems capable of allowing them to hear differences in cables._

 

Not all are new, markl, we have old and experienced members, even professionals and musicians among our members that do not hear the differences neither, or at least, not as they claim them to be...

  Quote:


 2. Upon arrival here, they've just been told they need headphones they can barely afford, amps and better sources they can't, and now cables. Cables! That's the final straw! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			








 I reject your voodoo cables! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I reject things that I can't afford! (Natural human reaction.) 
 

Some of them can, see the thread opened by Welly Wu, that after spending literally thousands in tweaks and mods an cables, arrived to the conclusion that they are not so noticeable as many people claim them to be, and in some cases none...

  Quote:


 3. You need developed ears and experience comparing lots of gear before things at the level of cables become clearly audible to you. Again, the crowd here is mostly younger and so often struggle to tell the difference between amps, let alone cables. 
 

But that is the same excuse to avoid offering evidences, we hear time after time here, if the cable believers want to stop an argument, what they have to do is very simple, just find an evidence of why, and the skeptics will accept forever the existence of them. What is a fact, and what is proved, nobody discuss about that. Who still believe in the flat earth over elephants, why not? Because there are evidences that show a round planet, just try to be a little more objective and you will get rid of the skeptics!!!

  Quote:


 4. The level of expectation for what kind of difference a cable can make is all wrong. They seem to be expecting some earth-shattering complete re-imagining of the sonics, but that's not what you get. They will not accept that the difference is much less than that, and likely falls outside the level at which they are currently capable of perceiving. 
 

The level of expectation and the differences heard have been extremely exaggerated by the believers, along the time, they are who claim those differences to be day and night, while indeed, if any, they should be really subtle...

  Quote:


 5. Inexperienced people pick the over-tweaked hyper-bright TV screen on the shop floor ("oooh, look at that!), the "louder" and bass-heavy pumping speaker in the wall of speakers at the Best Buy. That doesn't mean they are better devices or perform better at all, but at the level of their perception abilities, only differences that strong and glaring are perceived, and usually deemed "superior" even though they are not. When an audio cable does not "pop" like the loudest, most obnoxious speaker in the shop, they can't hear it and so think it's bunk.


 6. Young people (in general) do not just sit and listen to music (especially nowadays), doing nothing else. They're busy multi-tasking, and music is in the background of whatever else they are involved in. Of course, under these circumstances, how are they ever going to hear mere cable differences? 
 

Not the same case all the time, this is IMO a completely gross generalization, you can find skeptics at all levels of education and instruction...many are professionals and musicians...

  Quote:


 7. They're in college and going through that de-programming process where everything they learned in school so far turns out to be mostly over-simplified pap. They are in that stage where they want to reject everything with a skeptic's eye. They're so disillusioned, they need *proof* of everything. They also think they know it all, and anything someone over 30 says is true must be a lie. I can say this because I went through it too, and so did everyone else. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I could go on, but I'll stop there. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



 

I think that better stop there...for our own sanity...whatever is perceptible by our senses, is most of the times, if not all the times, measurable by instruments, indeed instruments offer a lot more accuracy and precision than any human perception, that was why they were created, to go where we can not go by ourselves...
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Guys I think that you feel that cables are like a mystical topic that was created by an alien outside the earth. The science behind cables is 100 years old, and plain and simple, indeed the simplest of the electronics in general, not sure why trying to make an argument of that, or trying to create a mystical thing around them, cables have three parameters the same we know for 100 years, and the interaction among them period, simple as that...unless some of you want to be a new candidate for the Nobel prize...


----------



## dazzer1975

Semantics?

 There is a world of difference between what you are saying, and how you are saying it.

 If indeed you are even sayin anything above and beyond the way you are saying it.

 Essentially Markl tried proving the efficacy of different cables by detracting from and attacking those who do not believe in cables.

 I didn't really have to point that out though right?

 I mean ad hominem and straw man attacks aren't exactly the best way of lending weight to any argument.

 I shall withdraw from this "debate".


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rustbucket* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The forum is actually 'Cables, Power, Tweaks, Speakers, Accessories'

 The non-believers may be here for one of the other topics in this forum. Or they may just like to start trouble. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

The forum is not called *"The existent and true real differences written in stone by God, between cables, power cables, tweaks, speakers and accessories"* So what makes you think that post about the so claimed differences is OK, and to post about that there is none is wrong? Or that ask for a logical evidence is wrong, that is another wrong assumption...

 Cables is as any other topic debatable, it is tue that is very controversial, but if we discuss about different presenation in heapdhones and amps in other forums, why not discuss about if we hear or not differences, and which are those in case you hear them....
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	










 I do not think that there are more kids, or more poor people in headfi, or less trained, what I do beleive is that we have gained a lot of more objective andpractical way of thinking!!! Cables are simply the last tweak in a given system, not the first as many try to claim...


----------



## markl

Quote:


 Essentially Markl tried proving the efficacy of different cables by detracting from and attacking those who do not believe in cables. 
 

 You have yet to cite the attack. Where did I call anyone a name?

  Quote:


 Not all are new, markl, we have old and experienced members, even professionals and musicians among our members that do not hear the differences neither, or at least, not as they claim them to be... 
 

Al, you quoted a post where I clearly state I'm not talking about everyone.

 OK, if you want to be hard core, Al, I never double-blind tested any of my comparisons of Rudistor gear against any other. I don't have a sample size greater than one (myself). I can't "prove" Rudi's stuff is any better than any other amp, even, say, Kevin Gilmore's designs. You seem fine with all my claims about them, based on "nothing" though they are. I've yet to see you protest any of my opinions on the amps you represent, despite the fact that I test them under the same conditions as any cable I review.

 Would you like me to withdraw all the positive things I said about Rudistor amps, and have my reviews of his products removed from the site because they are clearly invalid as I never did DBT on them?

 I thought not...


----------



## FooTemps

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Luminette* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Sounds like desperation-driven obscure semantics to me, reminiscient of quotations of famed but sub-par thinkers of the 19th century

 Maybe I just need a BJ._

 

could you please shut up? you're making us youngins look bad by sucking up and not adding anything to the conversation. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Both sides have good(ish) points though it seems a bit extremist either way. I say freaking drop the subject and believe what you will. No one will bother to prove the science/faith of cables since they just ARE NOT WORTH IT. You get decent cables and you have 99.32875% performance. Just because some electrons won't flow through 100% doesn't mean you don't get near optimum. Just wait for carbon nanotubes that are perfectly aligned at the molecular level.


----------



## sejarzo

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *markl* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_ So your mind is open, and you don't mock people who hear a difference between cables? You have never demanded double-blind testing results for cable claims on this site?_

 

Yes, my mind is open....but when dealing with the physical world, I want a better level of understanding, and am unwilling to leave it at the "I hear it, thus it is true" level of mystery. And it shouldn't take a "Manhattan Project of cables" to gain that.

 I'd just like to hear a specific and believable reason for why a particular design is superior, that's all, with some non-emotional test method to back up the claim.

 Just because a certain group of people discredit DBT because it causes arguments on this forum doesn't mean that it is universally invalid as a method of discovery, does it? If it is, then don't take prescription drugs, even if your life depends on it.....that's the universally accepted way of determing efficacy and safety.


----------



## sejarzo

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *markl* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_ ..... I don't have a sample size greater than one (myself). I can't "prove" Rudi's stuff is any better than any other amp, even, say, Kevin Gilmore's designs. You seem fine with all my claims about them, based on "nothing" though they are...._

 

OK, I'm quoting out of context here, but seriously markl......think about it from a somewhat different perspective, but keeping in mind that "I can't prove" concept, as it were....

 If differences in cables are not perceptible to the majority of listeners, and there are many experienced listeners with quality gear and sources who find the differences, if any, to be negligible, to whom do you want to address cable reviews? If this is such a matter of personal perceptions, why should anyone believe that your perceptions will be any truer for them than those of many other listeners?


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *markl* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Al, you quoted a post where I clearly state I'm not talking about everyone.

 OK, if you want to be hard core, Al, I never double-blind tested any of my comparisons of Rudistor gear against any other. I don't have a sample size greater than one (myself). I can't "prove" Rudi's stuff is any better than any other amp, even, say, Kevin Gilmore's designs. 

 Would you like me to withdraw all the positive things I said about Rudistor amps, and have my reviews of his products removed from the site because they are clearly invalid as I never did DBT on them?

 I thought not..._

 

I'm not being hardcore, and I'm not saying that you are wrong, or right, all I'm saying is that you are generalizing too much, and placing all skeptics in the same bag...While it is not fair for the ones who have experience, money, gear, and good trained ears, and do not perceive these differences the way they are claimed by many of you...and in some cases none...

 You know that we agree in many topics in audio, and even in the musical taste, and I personally have followed your advice and experience many times with excellent results, but it is true also that we agree to disagree in the cables topic, long time ago...

 I do not want you to withdraw any of your reviews, I consider them very well done, and the Rudistor amp was indeed compared to another very good amp you had, and that was a good comparison, IMO, and a point of reference for any member looking for an advice, but in case you want to begin with one, I do believe that the amps/headphones reviews are the last to choose from.....[size=xx-small]cough.....cough.....the power cords one would be more appropriate to begin with....cough..cough....[/size]


----------



## markl

Quote:


 If differences in cables are not perceptible to the majority of listeners 
 

 Whoa! 
 Majority of listenerers my *ss. The majority of new listeners with not much experience, maybe.

 sejarzo, the uncomfortable fact is that it's only on here (and forums like Hydrogen Audio, the root of all evil 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




), that there's any real debate about aftermarket audio cables. This is not some brand new concept that's just been perpetrated on the audio community.

 Look at the market. There are THOUSANDS of companies offering aftermarket cables. They are selling them to real live people and have been for years and years. 

 People with experience and funds seek them out. Why? Because they are bunk? No, because they've heard a difference.


----------



## Akathisia

To all of the cable skeptics that continue to have threads locked over and over and over for the same bullsh*t thread crapping -

 Soon all of the cable believers will cease to come to head-fi (and with them, most of the users who actually own higher end gear), and the cables/tweaks section will cease to be active.


----------



## Currawong

I don't think anyone's points are invalid in this discussion. The problem arrises because people are either thinking that _only_ their points are valid, or are thinking that everyone else is thinking that.

 The point again is that there IS no black and white. However, many people simply are not capable of thinking in more than two dimensions. People read about one DBT, or have one experience and align themselves with that, refusing to accept anything different. That's the worst of it. If anyone wants to think of a very ridiculous contradiction, a single DBT test (a scientific experiment) showing, say, no difference in a single system between cables being used for the very unscientific conclusion that cables make no difference. Even multiple tests don't escape this, as this is just multiple individual situations. 

 Correspondingly, people who can hear a difference suggesting that in all situations people should buy expensive cables would be equally silly, as not everyone's gear nor hearing, and not to mention, _goals in listening to music_ are the same.

 What it comes down to is emotions overcoming common sense and the old rule that people individually need to go and find out what works best for them.


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *markl* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Look at the market. There are THOUSANDS of companies offering aftermarket cables. They are selling them to real live people and have been for years and years. 

 People with experience and funds seek them out. Why? Because they are bunk? No, because they've heard a difference._

 


 LOL.....well by this same logic, we can see around that there are thousands of penis enlargement pills and patches, and products to grow your hair back, and pills and methods to loose weight, and they sell them by millions a day as well, and to people who beleive in them also...There will be always a market for everything in life, good things and bad things...and I'm not saying that the cables are among the bad things, OK?

 OTOH, there are also other cable manufacturers, that sell them for a more reasonable prices, and have been there for years as well, with no need of charge them $1000.00 for a cable to live of the profits, and have paid employees and a company...Maybe not considered as that good, but do the job nicely....


----------



## markl

Quote:


 I do not want you to withdraw any of your reviews, I consider them very well done, and the Rudistor amp was indeed compared to another very good amp you had, and that was a good comparison, IMO, and a point of reference for any member looking for an advice, but in case you want to begin with one, I do believe that the amps/headphones reviews are the last to choose.....cough.....cough.....the power cords one would be more appropriate to begin with....cough..cough.... 
 

 Hi Al, as you know, I like you as a person, and I like the products you represent. However, the fact remains that if my opinion on Rudi's amps is valid, so is my opinion on power cables and aftermarket ICs as they were formulated under the same circumstances. You have not listened to all the power cords I have, attached as they were in many cases to Rudi's amps, so you can't say my impressions are wrong. To be consistent, I'm either a rube and delusional about everything I've ever written about (including Rudi's gear), or if I'm right about one thing, I'm right about the rest. What if I said that Rudi's amps are not complete until they have the right power cord attached to them? Well, that's what I'm saying.


----------



## Wmcmanus

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *markl* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You have yet to cite the attack. Where did I call anyone a name?

 Al, you quoted a post where I clearly state I'm not talking about everyone.

 OK, if you want to be hard core, Al, I never double-blind tested any of my comparisons of Rudistor gear against any other. I don't have a sample size greater than one (myself). I can't "prove" Rudi's stuff is any better than any other amp, even, say, Kevin Gilmore's designs. You seem fine with all my claims about them, based on "nothing" though they are. I've yet to see you protest any of my opinions on the amps you represent, despite the fact that I test them under the same conditions as any cable I review.

 Would you like me to withdraw all the positive things I said about Rudistor amps, and have my reviews of his products removed from the site because they are clearly invalid as I never did DBT on them?

 I thought not..._

 

*[size=x-large]ZING!!![/size]* As a well known Head-Fi'er would say, "good stuff!"


----------



## sejarzo

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *markl* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Whoa! 
 Majority of listenerers my *ss. The majority of new listeners with not much experience, maybe.

 sejarzo, the uncomfortable fact is that it's only on here (and forums like Hydrogen Audio, the root of all evil 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





), that there's any real debate about aftermarket audio cables. This is not some brand new concept that's just been perpetrated on the audio community.

 Look at the market. There are THOUSANDS of companies offering aftermarket cables. They are selling them to real live people and have been for years and years. 

 People with experience and funds seek them out. Why? Because they are bunk? No, because they've heard a difference._

 

I never said "audiophiles"......I said "listeners."

 THOUSANDS of specialty cable manufacturers, you say??? I'd like a list.

 And why do so many of these cables, even after experienced listeners have auditioned them, end up on the Audiogon used cable listings, I wonder?

 Go back in this thread.....post #6, in which you claim:

_"4. The level of expectation for what kind of difference a cable can make is all wrong. They seem to be expecting some earth-shattering complete re-imagining of the sonics, but that's not what you get. They will not accept that the difference is much less than that, and *likely falls outside the level at which they are currently capable of perceiving*."_

 Again, who do you want to influence by reviewing or giving impressions of cables?


----------



## sejarzo

Expensive sugar pills work better than cheap ones - Yahoo! News


----------



## gotchaforce

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_LOL.....well by this same logic, we can see around that there are thousands of penis enlargement pills and patches, and products to grow your hair back, and pills and methods to loose weight, and they sell them by millions a day as well, and to people who beleive in them also...There will be always a market for everything in life, good things and bad things...and I'm not saying that the cables are among the bad things, OK?

 OTOH, there are also other cable manufacturers, that sell them for a more reasonable prices, and have been there for years as well, with no need of charge them $1000.00 for a cable to live of the profits, and have paid employees and a company...Maybe not considered as that good, but do the job nicely...._

 

Hey man penis enlargement pills obviously work... you dont see many people buying those pills and then saying they didnt work right? (oh wait maybe its because they WANTED to see results, or they just dont want to admit that it didnt work! glad this doesnt apply to cables at all)


----------



## Wmcmanus

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *markl* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Hi Al, as you know, I like you as a person, and I like the products you represent. However, the fact remains that if my opinion on Rudi's amps is valid, so is my opinion on power cables and aftermarket ICs as they were formulated under the same circumstances. You have not listened to all the power cords I have, attached as they were in many cases to Rudi's amps, so you can't say my impressions are wrong. To be consistent, I'm either a rube and delusional about everything I've ever written about (including Rudi's gear), or if I'm right about one thing, I'm right about the rest. What if I said that Rudi's amps are not complete until they have the right power cord attached to them? Well, that's what I'm saying._

 

*[size=x-large]ZING!!! x 2[/size]* 

 As they say here in Cayman, "You go, boy!!!" This thread has markl written all over it. I mean, this guy has spent countless hours doing cable comparisons and writing up reviews, only to have each and every one of those reviews crapped all over, again and again, by a bunch of people who haven't bothered to do the comparisons themselves. Why? Oh, because those cables couldn't even theoretically make _any_ difference whatsoever. 

 Ok, sure, if you hear this kind of criticism once or twice, you just suck it up and be a man about it, defend your perspective and move on. But when it's the same persistent pattern (by the select few objectivist flag wavers) over and over, endlessly, on each and every thread that ever discusses subjective listening impressions between cables... then ya, the guy has every right to be sick of it. 

 So as he's stated here, either he can hear the differences that he's described between headphones, and amps, and sources, and cables, or he can hear none of it at all. I vote that he can hear the differences he describes as between various cables. 

 I know that I can hear the differences that I describe between cables, or I wouldn't bother to waste people's time with my opinions. I mean, really. What purpose would that serve? Waste a bunch of my time and then write up an elaborate review describing what I hear if I don't really hear it? Do people really believe that's what cable reviewers are doing?


----------



## Wmcmanus

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *sejarzo* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Expensive sugar pills work better than cheap ones - Yahoo! News_

 

Troll posts irrelevant link. There, we're even.


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *markl* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Hi Al, as you know, I like you as a person, and I like the products you represent. However, the fact remains that if my opinion on Rudi's amps is valid, so is my opinion on power cables and aftermarket ICs as they were formulated under the same circumstances. You have not listened to all the power cords I have, attached as they were in many cases to Rudi's amps, so you can't say my impressions are wrong. To be consistent, I'm either a rube and delusional about everything I've ever written about (including Rudi's gear), or if I'm right about one thing, I'm right about the rest. What if I said that Rudi's amps are not complete until they have the right power cord attached to them? Well, that's what I'm saying._

 

Again Mark, I never say that you were wrong (or right), and never say that your opinion should be dismissed, all the opposite, you have a lot of experience, and we respect that, but I would like that the beleivers for one day, respect the other opinions as well, that have tried and have not perceived those differences...It is like my way, or the highway attitude. 

 You believe in cables, and I also believe to some extent, specially those who carry analog audio signal, in others I simply do not, and those are the ones we do not agree...but you made a few generalizations, that are not right, and will not help you to sustain the argument...Also there is a difference in hearing a difference, and stating becasue I paid more will get more, some prices are simply ridiculous, and do not justify the performance, and in some cases are worst than other cheaper options...you feel the same way in the review of the cables you made, some cables that were more expensive simply are at the end of the list...and a $20.00 cable is in the middle above them... 


  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_*[size=x-large]ZING!!![/size]* As a well known Head-Fi'er would say, "good stuff!" 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

I don't know if it was good, but at least was a pretty smart movement to neutralize the liberation front...LOL...!!!


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_So as he's stated here, either he can hear the differences that he's described between headphones, and amps, and sources, and cables, or he can hear none of it at all. I vote that he can hear the differences he describes as between various cables. 

 I know that I can hear the differences that I describe between cables, or I wouldn't bother to waste people's time with my opinions. I mean, really. What purpose would that serve? Waste a bunch of my time and then write up an elaborate review describing what I hear if I don't really hear it? Do people really believe that's what cable reviewers are doing? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

You know according to your vast experience that the differences between different amps, or drivers, are a lot more noticeable than the ones you can perceive on a cable swap, so that is IMO another generalization. 

 You can hear a difference in amps, musical intruments, headphones, speakers, and not in cables, very simple, they are not at the same magnitude, and the relevance is not the same...

 Do you know of any cable, that can give you a change in the sound of a system, similar to the one you can get if you were going from an HD650 to an R-10, or to the PS-1, etc....? Or maybe going from the HR-2 to a C-Moy? Now place a paper clip, and then repalce them for a $1000.00 cable later on, are those differences similar?


----------



## FooTemps

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_ Now place a paper clip, and then repalce them for a $1000.00 cable later on, are those differences similar?_

 

Could very well be. Maybe the paper clip can't carry a good digital signal? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 (why is everyone ignoring all my posts trying to promote moderate and cool headed behavior?)


----------



## Wmcmanus

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You know according to your vast experience that the differences between different amps, or drivers, are a lot more noticeable than the ones you can perceive on a cable swap, so that is IMO another generalization. 

 You can hear a difference in amps, musical intruments, headphones, speakers, and not in cables, very simple, they are not at the same magnitude, and the relevance is not the same...

 Do you know of any cable, that can give you a change in the sound of a system, similar to the one you can get if you were going from an HD650 to an R-10, or to the PS-1, etc....? Or maybe going from the HR-2 to a C-Moy? Now place a paper clip, and then repalce them for a $1000.00 cable later on, are those differences similar?_

 

I've not said that the differences that cables make are on the same order of magnitude as that made by speakers, headphones, amps, or sources. Only that cables can and do make a difference in the sound of a highly resolving system. I agree that this is not where to spend the bulk of your money. It's really for that last 1% or 2% or 5% or whatever, when you're fine tuning a system. Sometimes amps and sources don't make much difference either. But when you get into higher end systems, their effects become more noticeable. 

 All I'm really saying is that markl and others who have done extensive cable reviews can and do hear the differences they've described. Whether: 1) you will hear these differences with your ears in your system, or 2) even if you did, whether those differences would be important enough to you to make you want to spend your money on said cables, are other matters altogether. I'm not debating any of that.


----------



## Akathisia

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *FooTemps* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Could very well be. Maybe the paper clip can't carry a good digital signal? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 (why is everyone ignoring all my posts trying to promote moderate and cool headed behavior?)_

 

(Don't worry, most people head-fi only post to post, without reading other peoples responses to the OP. This thread is a rare occasion.)


----------



## FooTemps

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Akathisia* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_(Don't worry, most people head-fi only post to post, without reading other peoples responses to the OP. This thread is a rare occasion.)_

 

(i was wondering why postcounts were so high on this forum... I like how we won't be reprimanded by having this completely off topic conversation in parenthesis)


----------



## Arainach

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Troll posts irrelevant link. There, we're even._

 

Hardly irrelevant. More relevant, in fact, since you can scientifically prove placebos make a difference.


----------



## Uncle Erik

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *markl* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Look at the market. There are THOUSANDS of companies offering aftermarket cables. They are selling them to real live people and have been for years and years. 

 People with experience and funds seek them out. Why? Because they are bunk? No, because they've heard a difference._

 

Markl, what kind of experience are you referring to? Having listened to a lot of music? A lot of different gear? What?

 A big part of your argument is that experience is necessary to hear the difference. Alright, what experience is necessary? How did you get it? I want to know where you're coming from.

 This isn't a "gotcha," I want to know what you did to get to the position you take. Earlier, you said you changed your mind. How did that happen?


----------



## AC1

Here is another way to look at it...

 People on here respect other people's opinion concerning amps, headphones, etc even if it differs from their own. 

 People on here (in general) have very little respect for other people's opinions when it comes to cables, tweaks, etc.

 Now there are plenty of people on different sides of opinions of headphones, amps and cables. However, I have not seen anything proved either one way or the other for any type of gear. Meaning that any of the "technology" that relates to headphones, amps, or cables translates into a "positive" effect on sound. Yet we have this standard where since it is suppose to be so "obvious" things like headphones and amps are ok for us to hear the difference in while cables are not.


----------



## Currawong

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *AC1* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I have not seen anything proved either one way or the other for any type of gear._

 

That's because everyone's goals in listening to music are different. If everyone were aiming to reproduce when listening as close as possible the experience of listening live (IMHO the real purpose of hi-fi gear) most of this nonsense would be moot.


----------



## yotacowboy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *dazzer1975* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_If I told you my I.Q. you would feel a little foolish I feel._

 

what is your IQ?


----------



## fault151

I htough its a good time to ask the following question:

 What do Cardas do to their cables o meka them sound potentially better than stock headphone cables? Can someone explain and warrant the £100+ price tag please!


----------



## sejarzo

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Troll posts irrelevant link. There, we're even._

 

Not irrelevant........it proves that sensory perceptions are altered by otherwise irrelevant data. Same thing has been done for wine. Why would it not hold for cables?


----------



## dazzer1975

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *yotacowboy* 
_what is your IQ?_

 

with the usual caveats regarding wether it can be tested for, wether they are even testing those things that constitute intelligence, and the cultural biases...

 it is in the 98th percentile


----------



## ethebull

A few questions to consider for non-believers or anyone who strongly favors scientific measurement to validate perceived differences.

 What measured parameter or parameters can explain or accurately predict the following performance characteristics we all have clearly heard in different components? (or is that too big an assumptive premise)

 Sound stage depth
 Image specificity
 Bass impact
 High frequency edginess and listening fatigue
 Wider dynamic range

 - to name just a few.

 I already know many of the standard answers to expect. Let me stipulate that we are just talking for the moment about four different amplifiers. Each is operating well below its design limits. All four measure less than .1% THD, are rated at 100 watts/ch, etc., etc. Four good amps that measure more or less the same. 

 It must be “slew rate” or “current capability” or other measurements I haven’t mentioned that explain any perceived differences you’ll say. Assume these are all close enough in this group of four to be statistically or scientifically insignificant.

 Do they therefore all sound the same? Is the reviewer or owner who rates the performance of one over another delusional or a snake oil salesman?


----------



## cosmopragma

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *AC1* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_
 Now there are plenty of people on different sides of opinions of headphones, amps and cables. However, I have not seen anything proved either one way or the other for any type of gear._

 

Well, then you didn't look hard enough.
 Science has proven certain thresholds of perceptibility, and the measurable differences between headphones are way beyond those thresholds.
 Modern digital sources and (good) SS amps are not easy to distinguish in a DBT because they do perform close to or well below the thresholds of perceivability.
 Decent power cords and ICs measure slightly different, but at common lengths and application in a HiFi environment they are not distinguishable from a scientific point of view.
 AFAIK the cable believers didn't pass a single DBT successfully , and there are dozens of them I'm aware of and I have even participated in 2 of them.

 That's fact, and that's the reason why some members can't believe the naive crap they are reading here and feel the urge to call a lunatic a lunatic.

 Personally I'm comfortable with differing opinions even if unsubstantiated.
 As far as I'm concerned you can talk to elves all day long or throw your money into the ocean and enjoy to watch it swim.

 In the end it's not totally impossible that cables do make an subtle audible difference since there is no way to prove the impossibility.That's just the nature of the beast called science.It's just improbable, and in the light of those facts Markl's et al condescending claims of sceptics being young unexperienced paupers gives the term "chuzpah" a new meaning and is not easy to swallow.

 BTW: I do own relatively expensive (selected) cables.They probably do cost more than the complete rig of the average head-fier.As long as I don't perform a DBT they do sound clearly better than the cheap stuff.
 I can live with such contradictions.I laugh about it and it teaches me something.
 About my mind.


----------



## cosmopragma

The thread starter did suggest a special subforum for believers where even a hint of scepticism is not allowed.
 Although I can't subscribe to his general mind set I think that's a good idea.

 Unfortunately all mods I'm aware of (and the owner of the site as well) are believers and therefor they do plan the opposite AFAIK.
 Scepticism will be totally banned from head-fi.
 The sceptics will get a subforum, and naturally it will die fast.
 I mean, there's not much a bunch of sceptics have to say to each other.
 "Hello, I don't believe that cables do make an audible difference".
 "x2"
 "x3"
 "x4"

 That's predictable and obviously the hidden agenda.

 So, Wayne, tell me it's rumours and won't happen.
 Or just skip the subforum crap and call it what it is:
 Reason doesn't live here anymore.

 I agree that all those senseless disputes are annoying but banning science from head-fi is going too far.


----------



## Kees

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *markl* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_LOL, you must be new here. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 It wasn't always this way; this forum has totally degenerated over the last 3 years. 

 The reasons are manifold:

*-----------WARNING, OFFENSIVE & INCONVENIENT FACTUAL OBSERVATIONS AHEAD--------*

 1. Most head-fiers are young and new to audio (not all, but let's say 70%+). So they also usually lack the kinds of systems capable of allowing them to hear differences in cables.

 2. Upon arrival here, they've just been told they need headphones they can barely afford, amps and better sources they can't, and now cables. Cables! That's the final straw! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	







 I reject your voodoo cables! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I reject things that I can't afford! (Natural human reaction.)

 3. You need developed ears and experience comparing lots of gear before things at the level of cables become clearly audible to you. Again, the crowd here is mostly younger and so often struggle to tell the difference between amps, let alone cables.

 4. The level of expectation for what kind of difference a cable can make is all wrong. They seem to be expecting some earth-shattering complete re-imagining of the sonics, but that's not what you get. They will not accept that the difference is much less than that, and likely falls outside the level at which they are currently capable of perceiving. 

 5. Inexperienced people pick the over-tweaked hyper-bright TV screen on the shop floor ("oooh, look at that!), the "louder" and bass-heavy pumping speaker in the wall of speakers at the Best Buy. That doesn't mean they are better devices or perform better at all, but at the level of their perception abilities, only differences that strong and glaring are perceived, and usually deemed "superior" even though they are not. When an audio cable does not "pop" like the loudest, most obnoxious speaker in the shop, they can't hear it and so think it's bunk.

 6. Young people (in general) do not just sit and listen to music (especially nowadays), doing nothing else. They're busy multi-tasking, and music is in the background of whatever else they are involved in. Of course, under these circumstances, how are they ever going to hear mere cable differences?

 7. They're in college and going through that de-programming process where everything they learned in school so far turns out to be mostly over-simplified pap. They are in that stage where they want to reject everything with a skeptic's eye. They're so disillusioned, they need *proof* of everything. They also think they know it all, and anything someone over 30 says is true must be a lie. I can say this because I went through it too, and so did everyone else. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I could go on, but I'll stop there. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

I just felt the need to quote this post again, because I think it is a perfect bull's eye.

 About the older and more experienced that don't hear a difference: For some it could be true that the notion that, if they hear a difference their scientific beliefs may come in danger, is enough to make sure they don't hear it. They hear what they want to hear. They are convinced there is no difference so they hear no difference. It is called placebo.


----------



## meat01

Quote:


 A few questions to consider for non-believers or anyone who strongly favors scientific measurement to validate perceived differences. 
 

Non believers do not rely solely on scientific measurement. It is discussed here often, because we can not mention other testing methods to prove cables do not make a difference in sound.

 If you want to increase bass or other frequencies, an equalizer is a more suited tool for this application.

 I don't hate cables, I hate overpriced cables that have not been proven to make a difference in sound quality. If high priced cables make your system sound better whether perceived or otherwise, more power to you.

 I don't think people should crap in other people's threads when discussing a particular cable, but if someone is asking for a recommendation, I don't see a problem with recommending a cheaper alternative. I think it is absurd to claim one can't hear differences, just because someone is young or their system does not cost thousands of dollars, when the fact of the matter remains, audio differences in cables have yet to be proven.


----------



## cosmopragma

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Kees* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_They are convinced there is no difference so they hear no difference. It is called placebo._

 

No, that wouldn't be a placebo effect.
 Maybe "cognitive dissonance".
 It wouldn't explain why the believers always fail to pass a simple DBT successfully.
 Always.


----------



## Aimless1

There are so many factors that affect SQ: Source, IC, HP, temperature, humidity, and the listeners ear are ones that come to mind immediately. Whether cables actually affect SQ is a moot point. The only thing that matters is the perception (which includes belief or lack there of) of the person listening. There is NO right or wrong answer. What is right for me is likely to be wrong for you...and vice versa. 

 I may be wrong, but I believe this is what the OP was getting at. Respect for other posters and civility on this and all topics can lead to healthy discussions that allow for different points of view. There is always something to be learned from these kinds of discussions.

 This means that those that can "hear" the differences need to allow that this may not be measurable nor provable. Likewise, the scientific crowd needs to allow that tests and proofs are seldom the end of the discussion when it comes to subjective opinions. Trying to cram proof down the true believers throats is not going to change their perception just as those who believe the proof and can hear no difference don't need to listen to how their inferior hearing is the problem. 

 In that vein, I like cosmopragma's post. I tune out posters who preach dogma. I, for one, don't ride the fervor train. Science is a great tool. After all, it helped bring great A/V equipment to us. But it can't measure synergy. Perception is always clouded by beliefs which bias our view. Bias doesn't allow for proof. The truth (whatever that is) lies between those views, IMO.


----------



## yotacowboy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *yotacowboy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_what is your IQ?_

 

 Quote:


  Originally Posted by *dazzer1975* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_with the usual caveats regarding wether it can be tested for, wether they are even testing those things that constitute intelligence, and the cultural biases...

 it is in the 98th percentile_

 

Given your argument, would you feel a little foolish if I told you my IQ?

 In other words, if it's an "IQ pi$$ing match" you're after, and you somehow think there's correlation between IQ and "belief" in the subjective differences between audio cables - you might be mistaken. (This coming from someone lucky enough to be in the 99th percentile... and also lucky enough to understand what humility is... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




)


----------



## cosmopragma

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Aimless1* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_
 I may be wrong, but I believe this is what the OP was getting at. Respect for other posters and civility on this and all topics ....._

 

You are wrong.
  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *MatsudaMan* 
_Why are you guys even on a tweak forum if you're not about tweaks! This site is full of people who must not have very good equipment. If you have really good equipment you aren't going to use crappy cable. If you have crappy cable, you probably have crap equipment and get all pissed off when people say that cables make a difference. You can't tell because your equipment is crap. Oh yeah, and your ears are not refined. You don't need to tweak anything because you're not detail oriented, which is fine, because you don't notice when things are better or worse in a subtle way. Good for you. You don't have to buy good cables or other tweaks. Just go home and enjoy your Radio Shack cables and enjoy the music._

 

And the best is the guy is (according to his sig) utilizing mid-fi gear for his audio enjoyment.


----------



## krmathis

Some believe, some don't!
 This is a discussion board, where everybody are and should be allowed to post their true meaning. If the discussion are kept to the topic I don't see a problem with both "believers" and "non-believers" attending the same thread at all.

 I believe!


----------



## meat01

Quote:


 Some believe, some don't!
 This is a discussion board, where everybody are and should be allowed to post their true meaning. If the discussion are kept to the topic I don't see a problem with both "believers" and "non-believers" attending the same thread at all.

 I believe! 
 

I agree! kept to the topic is key as well as respecting others.


----------



## Riboge

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *cosmopragma* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Unfortunately all mods I'm aware of (and the owner of the site as well) are believers and therefor they do plan the opposite AFAIK.
 Scepticism will be totally banned from head-fi.
 The sceptics will get a subforum, and naturally it will die fast.
 I mean, there's not much a bunch of sceptics have to say to each other.
 "Hello, I don't believe that cables do make an audible difference".
 "x2"
 "x3"
 "x4"

 That's predictable and obviously the hidden agenda.

 So, Wayne, tell me it's rumours and won't happen.
 Or just skip the subforum crap and call it what it is:
 Reason doesn't live here anymore.

 I agree that all those senseless disputes are annoying but banning science from head-fi is going too far._

 

"Science" and "reason" have nothing to say on their own? They only function to debunk what others observe and believe? These are quite telling admissions about what the skeptics plaguing us are about and lack in the way of substantive material to post. And you seem to suggest that skeptics should state their disbelief once and then not keep repeating it since it would be boring to even them to the point of departure. Yet they do repeat themselves at EVERY opportunity...but only drive away others.


----------



## Akathisia

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *krmathis* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Some believe, some don't!
 This is a discussion board, where everybody are and should be allowed to post their true meaning. If the discussion are kept to the topic I don't see a problem with both "believers" and "non-believers" attending the same thread at all.

 I believe! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			



_

 

I don't see the problem with the _idea_ of both parties attending the same thread either, what I do see a problem with is every thread about a specific experience with a specific product being turned into the same old debate.

 Whenever the cable haters start a *new* thread... it normally ends up getting locked.


----------



## markl

Quote:


 Markl, what kind of experience are you referring to? Having listened to a lot of music? A lot of different gear? What?

 A big part of your argument is that experience is necessary to hear the difference. Alright, what experience is necessary? How did you get it? I want to know where you're coming from. 
 

 Hi, it comes from both listening to music and listening to lots and lots of different gear, cables, etc. I'm a music addict, theer is music on virtually all the time no matter where I am. I've got around 6,000 CDs/SACDs in my collection.

 There is no secret to this, and it doesn't rquire special "golden ears". Listening is simply a skill *anyone* can develop, and the process of improving your ability to hear differences never ends. I'm not the be-all and end-all of audiophiles at all; my experience is a drop in the bucket compared to many. But I will only continue to get better as I continue to go along.

 Over the last 20 years of audiophile-hood, I've been through 20+ headphones, a dozen CD players, 12 headphone amps, 30+ interconnects, 20+ power cables, 6 power conditioners/regenerators, 4 receivers, 4 multi-channel speaker amps, 3 two-channel speaker amps, 7 sets of speakers, 5 subwoofers. I'm sure I'm forgotten some things.

 Each time something new enters my system, it's a chance to learn and develop my listening skills. Each and every one of those components sounded different, some better some worse in different ways. Spotting the differences became easier and easier as I went along.


----------



## bigshot

Imagine how much more music you could have bought if you didn't have to go through so much equipment to sort out what sounds good!

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## Riboge

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Imagine how much more music you could have bought if you didn't have to go through so much equipment to sort out what sounds good!

 See ya
 Steve_

 

So it's better not to know "what sounds good"? This is once again a false dichotomy you pose between loving more music and loving how to more skillfully listen to and appreciate it. In Markl's case particularly, I'm sure he spends a vast amount on music and on developing his skills at listening concurrently. This is surely what we should be recommending to others, *both* and balance between them, not an extreme in either.


----------



## markl

Quote:


 Imagine how much more music you could have bought if you didn't have to go through so much equipment to sort out what sounds good! 
 

 I have around 6,000 CDs right now, but I've owned at least 10,000 during my lifetime. I'm buying new discs every week. I was recently thinking about how many years it would take for me to be able to listen to everything I have now. I got depressed thinking about all the albums I'll probably never get to listen to again. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	





 Also, I generally find listening to new gear a fun experience (especially when it turns out to be better than what I had), so it's not been some particularly horrible burden.


----------



## meat01

Whatever makes you happy is all that matters in this hobby, be it components, music, cables or tweaks.


----------



## JohnFerrier

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *meat01* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Whatever makes you happy is all that matters in this hobby, be it components, music, cables or tweaks._

 

--> music <--


----------



## mark_h

Took a painkiller once, made me feel better! Took a placebo once, made me feel better! I buy relatively expensive cables, why? To me my music sounds better; do I need proof or validation? Not at all! Will I continue to buy wonderfully made cables? Youbetcha!


----------



## fordgtlover

I personally can't tell the difference between cables. In my younger days I bought a set of Van den Hul cables and simply couldn't tell them from the decent budget cables I already had. I bought the budget cables over the suplied ones for build quality.

 Maybe I'm cloth eared?

 I just can't overcome the idea in my own mind that cables make that much of a difference. Particularly given the number of components inside my amps that are made of, or connect using standard old copper or less glamorous materials.

 If other people hear a difference - that's fine with me. I usually just come here for the entertainment of others arguing. Occassionally, the arguing gets informative.


----------



## nick_charles

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *dazzer1975* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_with the usual caveats regarding wether it can be tested for, wether they are even testing those things that constitute intelligence, and the cultural biases...it is in the 98th percentile_

 

So, tell us what herculean feats have you acheived with your massive IQ. Have you irrigated the desert, cured cancer , composed radical symphonies, derived new answers to arcane mathematical problems, converted base metal into gold ?







 As a person with two degrees in Psychology including a Masters degree that had a high component of Psychometrics, could I just add that there is substantial debate about the value of IQ tests and the validity of the whole traditional "intelligence" construct. 

 For reference my own IQ is only a smidgeon above average (110) , yet somehow I have managed to get three degrees, and hopefully a 4th later this year. 

 On the other hand I know several folks of measurably average or less IQ who can do things that I could never in a million years do and who have practical intelligence and survival capabilities far far in excess of mine. These folks make me feel humble, not foolish, as I hope I do the best with what I have, notwithstanding the appearance of short term memory loss with middle-age


----------



## nick_charles

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *markl* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I got depressed thinking about all the albums I'll probably_

 

For me the Larousse Encyclopedia of Music is the great depressant. Somewhere between 30,000 and 60,000 cataloged works in the classical (used as a simplistic ontological label) genre. Of which I have maybe 2500, I lost count when my spreadsheet got corrupted last year, and if my old man is any predictor only about 20 years to go


----------



## edstrelow

I hate cables too. 

 I just put in a $135.00 cable to use with a $100.00 amplifier and it makes a big difference. Now I find it disturbuing that a couple of dumb connectors and strands of wire is so important to sound quality. I can see why people are angry about this state of affairs. It just doesn't seem right.

 Also, while as I have noted in other sections, good psychophysical testing of perceived differences is difficult, surely it should be possible to at least find some physical measurements about differences between cable. 

 Actually I did this once (search for my name and "science project" in this forum) and found small measurable tonal differences between a stock cable and a mid price one. This was certainly not the ultimate measurement but it was more than I have ever seen from a cable company.

 But what can I do about this state of affairs other than gripe?

 I can see where many listeners are equally sensitive on this cost issue, especially the proportional costs of expensive cables vs the costs of other equipment. 

 I can also see that people don't want to be ripped off with expensive snake oil remedies and would like at least some measurements to back up their buying choices. Of course I don't see any other equipment being sold on the basis of measurements either. At best some maker may tout some aspect of design which may improve sound quality, and explain why it should in their opinion make a difference. At worst you get things like the Bose adverts for overpriced mediocre equipment where the selling point is all about name.

 But fhat's why I read the opinions to see what might or might not be a good remedy. 

 And I read these with a grain of salt.

 I pay more attention to those listeners with good equipment because I feel they are more likely to be alert to small differences. Also they will not be offended at the proposition that you may actually "get what you pay for." 

 However if that person is always changing components around, i.e. a new cable every few months, then I wonder if that person might just be going around in circles and listening to "differences" that are not "improvements."

 I also pay more attention to reviews based on listening with good headphones than with speakers. You are going to more easily hear a difference of a cable substitution feeding a headphone system, especially if it is the direct feed from the source to the headphone amp, than with speakers where you have got crossovers messing up the signals.

 Obviously this does not work with speaker cables.

 But there is also way too much trolling in this forum by people with no personal experience of the product in question. They are creating a hostile environment for those who do wish to compare notes on such things and defeating the purpose of this forum.

 Certainly one should be open to contrary opinions but if you have no experience of the product in question you probably have nothing worthwhile to add and you should not be shooting your mouth off about it.


----------



## Kees

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Imagine how much more music you could have bought if you didn't have to go through so much equipment to sort out what sounds good!

 See ya
 Steve_

 

Strange remark. At least for me that is a very big part of the fun of my audio hobby.....


----------



## UseName

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_*[size=x-large]ZING!!! x 2[/size]* 

 As they say here in Cayman, "You go, boy!!!" This thread has markl written all over it. I mean, this guy has spent countless hours doing cable comparisons and writing up reviews, only to have each and every one of those reviews crapped all over, again and again, by a bunch of people who haven't bothered to do the comparisons themselves. Why? Oh, because those cables couldn't even theoretically make any difference whatsoever. 

 Ok, sure, if you hear this kind of criticism once or twice, you just suck it up and be a man about it, defend your perspective and move on. But when it's the same persistent pattern (by the select few objectivist flag wavers) over and over, endlessly, on each and every thread that ever discusses subjective listening impressions between cables... then ya, the guy has every right to be sick of it. 

 So as he's stated here, either he can hear the differences that he's described between headphones, and amps, and sources, and cables, or he can hear none of it at all. I vote that he can hear the differences he describes as between various cables. 

 I know that I can hear the differences that I describe between cables, or I wouldn't bother to waste people's time with my opinions. I mean, really. What purpose would that serve? Waste a bunch of my time and then write up an elaborate review describing what I hear if I don't really hear it? Do people really believe that's what cable reviewers are doing? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 


 The placebo effect is very real and powerful... now before you get insulted, please note that I didn't say if I was believer or a non-believer. I will also say that if you were one that was effected by the placebo effect, it doesn't make you 'stupid', 'ignorant' or 'gulible'... it's just makes you human. 

 However, you must still respect the opinions of others because of that. Reviews are always subjective, so they should be ALWAYS be taken with a grain of salt. It doesn't matter if it is an amp, headphones or cables. There is always going to be a difference of opinions, biases, ect. 

 You and Markl claim to be able to hear a difference. But how is an outside observer suppose to know if you actually do or not? Until you prove that you can, we have to take your opinion with a grain of salt. 

 Back to the original topic. The reason there are so many 'haters' is really, really simple. It is that the 'science' is unproven. Period.


----------



## UseName

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *edstrelow* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_
 ... if you have no experience of the product in question you probably have nothing worthwhile to add and you should not be shooting your mouth off about it._

 


 I totally disagree with this, it is far too generic a statement. As an electical engineer, I could easily give worthwhile advice to some people without hands-on experience with a product. 

 I'm sure anyone on this forum would be able to give advice to a guy asking a question about pairing a set of bright sounding cans with a bright amp by simply looking at frequency response diagrams. Or argue with a guy who is powering a pair of stock earphones with a Max amp from headroom. You don't need experience with either one of these products to tell him he would get better sound with a better pair of headphones.


----------



## Kees

Some people claim to be able to hear that there is no a difference. But how is an outside observer suppose to know if they actually do or not? 

 The placebo effect is very real and powerful... 
 And the fact that they are convinced beyond a shadow of doubt that there cannot be any difference to hear will make it even more powerful.
 now before someone feels insulted, please note that I didn't say if I was believer or a non-believer. I will also say that if you were one that was effected by the placebo effect, it doesn't make you 'stupid', 'ignorant' or 'gulible'... it's just makes you human.


----------



## Drag0n

By the time youre trained enough to percieve small differences in sound quality and describe it,,youre of an age that your ears have degenerated to the point of inability to hear those differences youve now learned how to detect and describe. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 (That should stir something up! Bwaahahahaha!!! *evil laugh* ) 

 lol


----------



## dvw

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Kees* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Some people claim to be able to hear that there is no a difference. But how is an outside observer suppose to know if they actually do or not? 
_

 

A brain scan can tell what people are experiencing. However, even a brain scan can't tell if what people are experiencing are real or not. Here's a brain scan on wine tasting report.

Study: $90 wine tastes better than the same wine at $10 | Underexposed - CNET News.com

 Subjects are actually experiencing more pleasure, drinking what perceived to be a better wine. IMO, people do hear a difference and that's nothing wrong with that.

 IMO, all cable "should" sound the same, unless something is added or subtracted from the input signal. Input should = output if the cable is good.


----------



## JohnFerrier

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *dvw* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_A brain scan can tell what people are experiencing. However, even a brain scan can't tell if what people are experiencing are real or not. Here's a brain scan on wine tasting report.

Study: $90 wine tastes better than the same wine at $10 | Underexposed - CNET News.com

 Subjects are actually experiencing more pleasure, drinking what perceived to be a better wine. IMO, people do hear a difference and that's nothing wrong with that.

 IMO, all cable "should" sound the same, unless something is added or subtracted from the input signal. Input should = output if the cable is good._

 

You posted an interesting link. "Researchers from the California Institute of Technology and Stanford's business school..." "...published this week (January 2008) in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences."

 "The research, along with other studies the authors allude to, are putting a serious dent in economists' notions that experienced pleasantness of a product is based on its intrinsic qualities."

 "Contrary to the basic assumptions of economics, several studies have provided behavioral evidence that marketing actions can successfully affect experienced pleasantness by manipulating nonintrinsic attributes of goods."

 -

 Full report here. "We conjecture that any action affecting expectations of product quality, such as expert quality ratings; peer reviews; information about country of origin, store, and brand names (especially those associated with luxury products); and repeated exposure to advertisements might lead to effects similar to those identified here." 


 .


----------



## gotchaforce

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *edstrelow* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I just put in a $135.00 cable to use with a $100.00 amplifier and it makes a big difference. Now I find it disturbuing that a couple of dumb connectors and strands of wire is so important to sound quality. I can see why people are angry about this state of affairs. It just doesn't seem right._

 

This is why we who think cables make no difference post on this forum.

 "it makes a big difference", he didnt even say "i HEAR" he just said it DOES! 

 Spending $135 cable on a $100 amplifier is something people do who dont even begin to grasp the concept of "diminishing returns". Im afraid people who are new to the headphone audiophile world will read this and go down the same path of "wow this $100 pretty cable will clearly improve my sound since so people say it makes a night and day difference and its so pretty looking"

 How anyone can say cables make a "big" difference when theres so much debate on whether cables even MAKE a difference in the first place completely bewilders me. All i can think is these people are schizophrenics and should be taking medication, or the cable they are using is broken and is throwing away half the frequency response of the amp.


----------



## Currawong

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *mark_h* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Took a painkiller once, made me feel better! Took a placebo once, made me feel better! I buy relatively expensive cables, why? To me my music sounds better; do I need proof or validation? Not at all! Will I continue to buy wonderfully made cables? Youbetcha!_

 

A mate of mine, who is the seemingly rare combination of a muso and hi-fi nut, regularly bets $500 with disbelieving customers that cables will make difference. He has never lost. 

 What I said before about DBT is that people's generalisations about what they mean are completely un-scientific. A test only tests who and what was there at the time, nothing more. What I've seen of DBT tests though is that they pick the cable makers with the worst reputation for hype, so it wouldn't surprise me if there was no difference in all of those cases. People do tests to get the result they want to get. It's very dangerous to think that because a supposedly "scientific" test was done that something is conclusive.


----------



## sejarzo

I agree, gotchaforce....the use of the term "big" is relative more than absolute when it comes to cabling, presuming that the cables in question are not physically defective.

 A couple of newbs had serious problems getting their 0404 USB's working, and eventually through a lot of PM's I managed to help them get things stabilized. Once that happened, both decided that they didn't like the overly bright sound of the 0404 USB into their headamp and headphones, so they soon asked me what interconnects could they buy to fix the "problem"...which wasn't any problem, it was simply that they were finally hearing their gear fed by a decent source compared to onboard sound from a notebook and an old SB card, respectively.

 And when I told them to plug their cans into the 0404 USB headphone out and tell me what they thought, gee, guess what????

 They said it was too bright, too......so, what sort of replacement headphone cable would I recommend to fix that?


----------



## dazzer1975

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *yotacowboy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Given your argument, would you feel a little foolish if I told you my IQ?

 In other words, if it's an "IQ pi$$ing match" you're after, and you somehow think there's correlation between IQ and "belief" in the subjective differences between audio cables - you might be mistaken. (This coming from someone lucky enough to be in the 99th percentile... and also lucky enough to understand what humility is... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




)_

 

I also scoredin the 99h percentile on the unsupervised test, but for the supervised official test my score was in the 98th.

 I also find it hard to believe you actually did score in the 99th percentile considering you ASOLUTELY failed to undestand my post.

 Itis more than clear and evidet to anyone, should they wish to go back and read the post I made I was not even talking about cables and "belif" when I mentioned my i.q.

 You, regardles of your i.q. did just happen to make yourself look foolish.

 Just go back and read my posts and you will understand where I am positioned in the cable debate, andthen, you may also see to what I actually replied to when I mentioned my i.q.

 If you want a pissing contest, fair enough, but I sugget you learn to read first.


 Seriously, I am absolutely in a state of diselief that you can even attempt to SUGGEST that I placed i.q. anywhere near the realm of "cable belief"

 Seriously, you really do need to re-read the post I made.

 Infact, the post you qouted from me, containd the quote I replied to, and yet you STILL failed to comprehend what it was I replying to.

 You sir, are a star.


----------



## dazzer1975

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *nick_charles* 
_ could I just add that there is substantial debate about the value of IQ tests and the validity of the whole traditional "intelligence" construct. 
_

 

I believe I covered this. hence I agree, and included it.


----------



## edstrelow

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *UseName* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I totally disagree with this, it is far too generic a statement. As an electical engineer, I could easily give worthwhile advice to some people without hands-on experience with a product. 

 ._

 

Maybe you could give some advice about somethings electrical but not about what a product sounds like without even seeing or hearing it. 

 Actually you kind of prove one of my points.

 The reason we don't get test results about things like cables is that the engineers who make them "know" what they will sound like without actual testing.

 They then forget to confirm the prediction by testing the product, or in this case listening to it.

 Basically "trust me I'm an engineer."

 You guys aren't going to change your ways so I do my own listening.


  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *gotchaforce* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_This is why we who think cables make no difference post on this forum.

 "it makes a big difference", he didnt even say "i HEAR" he just said it DOES! 

 ._

 

This is grasping at straws. Obviously it made a difference to me, just trying to cut down on the word count. 

 Stop arguing and do some listening of your own. Then you might have something interesting to say.


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_




 I've not said that the differences that cables make are on the same order of magnitude as that made by speakers, headphones, amps, or sources. Only that cables can and do make a difference in the sound of a highly resolving system. I agree that this is not where to spend the bulk of your money. It's really for that last 1% or 2% or 5% or whatever, when you're fine tuning a system. Sometimes amps and sources don't make much difference either. But when you get into higher end systems, their effects become more noticeable._

 

Probably you didn't mean it, but what I understood from your post was that if we dismiss partially an opinion, we have to dismiss the whole opinion this person has on a given subject. Something like: if you dismiss the cable reviews, then you have to dismiss the amp reviews, and headphone reviews, as well. What IMO is not necessarily the logic behind this argument, as we could simply agree with one person in his/her opinions partially, just because they are partially common to both, and both have been experienced them in a similar way, and that does not include *all topics* on a given subject...

 In other words if I do not see why if I do not agree with Mark in his cables opinions, or reviews, for good and valid that they could be, (and I do believe that they are as good as they could be, and very informative, for the ones who believe in them), I necessarily have to dismiss the rest of his wonderful well written work, while I have felt more or less the same, and the differences that could be heard between the different topics on hand, he had reviewed along his career, are not of the same level of magnitude or relevance...

 I agree with Mark in the amps, sources, headphones, and even the music, but we maybe do not agree on other topics...We will keep on having fun enjoying our respective systems, the music, and if I heard of something new, headphones, amps, sources, trust me that he will be one of the firsts that will cross my mind, to give the heads up, same as you, Wayne....and who knows maybe one day you guys can convince me that I'm wrong, but after trying a few of them, this had not happen yet...


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *edstrelow* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Stop arguing and do some listening of your own. Then you might have something interesting to say._

 

The problem with the believers is simply this one, they want the skeptics always to try, and while they try, the believers are 100% convinced that they will become cable adorers as well, but what happen while this does not happen...???
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 [size=large]*NO*[/size] sometimes simply this does not happen, and the magical change they expect in their minds, simply never get materialized. FYI there are a lot of skeptics, that do *have tried many times*, *many cables*, and while they have reported back stating that they do not perceive any difference, then, they are dumb, or deaf, or a child, or the equipment is not revelaing enough, becasue, *must to be* a difference, and *they must hear* that difference...say by whom???

 Guys leave room for other opinions as well...you listen, you feel there is a difference, others listened as well, and felt there is none...is that so hard to understand, that not everybody is basing the opinions is just conceptual ideas, that is life...period...learn to live with that.....


----------



## sejarzo

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *edstrelow* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_ Maybe you could give some advice about somethings electrical but not about what a product sounds like without even seeing or hearing it._

 

You don't believe that it is possible, for an EE with knowledge of the various shortcomings of various circuit topologies, to predict that a particular design will sound worse than another......or have I misunderstood the above?

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *edstrelow* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_ The reason we don't get test results about things like cables is that the engineers who make them "know" what they will sound like without actual testing._

 

Umm, run that by someone like Ray Kimber and then get back to us, OK?

 And exactly how do the engineers who design cables prevent another party from performing serious testing to determine differences? 

 Your statement is patently ridiculous.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *edstrelow* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_They then forget to confirm the prediction by testing the product, or in this case listening to it._

 

And that one, too. Let us know what Ray thinks about that claim.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *edstrelow* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_ Basically "trust me I'm an engineer." You guys aren't going to change your ways so I do my own listening._

 

Well, then, why don't you listen to recordings and audio gear that were designed and built without the involvement of any engineers?


----------



## 883dave

And so it goes....

 These threads always end with people arguing about arguing

 What a waste of effort and time


----------



## yotacowboy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *dazzer1975* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You sir, are a star._

 

I appreciate the compliment!


----------



## gotchaforce

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *edstrelow* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_This is grasping at straws. Obviously it made a difference to me, just trying to cut down on the word count. 

 Stop arguing and do some listening of your own. Then you might have something interesting to say._

 

Sorry, it isnt grasping for straws when tons of people have used the phrase "night and day difference", or variants of, in their review of $150 headphone cables for their $300 headphones, or $300 ALO line outs for their ipods, or $500 digital coax from their dac to amp.


----------



## sejarzo

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *edstrelow* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The reason we don't get test results about things like cables is that the engineers who make them "know" what they will sound like without actual testing.

 They then forget to confirm the prediction by testing the product, or in this case listening to it._

 

Quoting from the Kimber Kable web site:

_"KIMBER KABLE products are created using our own OSCaR engineering process. OSCaR stands for Objective Subjective Correlation and Results. * Through this process we make the estimable and critical link between scientific measurements and listening impressions. * This process is aided in great measure by our exceptionally advanced test and research facility, which is regarded as one of the most well equipped in the audio industry. In addition, KIMBER KABLE also has a vast research library which allows our engineering team access to past research as well as the latest technologies."_


----------



## fishski13

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *gotchaforce* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Sorry, it isnt grasping for straws when tons of people have used the phrase "night and day difference", or variants of, in their review of $150 headphone cables for their $300 headphones, or $300 ALO line outs for their ipods, or $500 digital coax from their dac to amp._

 


 agreed, lots of b.s. - and this coming from a "Believer" in cables. 

 i equate the sonic differences between cable rolling and tube rolling equal - yet the tube rollers don't seem to get beat-up here.

 PACE


----------



## FooTemps

I say cable rolling and tube rolling are two slightly different creatures.

 Cables will to a degree have similar effects as tube rolling, but it reaches the point of diminishing returns far before tube rolling does.

 That's about it though.


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Kees* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Strange remark. At least for me that is a very big part of the fun of my audio hobby....._

 

The music is what matters. You should put together an optimal system and then listen to music. Equipment swapping is a waste of money and valuable time that could be better spent learning about music.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Riboge* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_So it's better not to know "what sounds good"?_

 

No, it's better to make an informed decision about what will produce the desired result instead of randomly swapping equipment in and out. I see absolutely no reason to go through five subwoofers, unless you're listening to music at ungodly levels.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *markl* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I have around 6,000 CDs right now, but I've owned at least 10,000 during my lifetime. I'm buying new discs every week. I was recently thinking about how many years it would take for me to be able to listen to everything I have now. I got depressed thinking about all the albums I'll probably never get to listen to again._

 

I have over 8,000 CDs, tens of thousands of records going back 100 years, seven iPods packed with different kinds of music, two crank up Victrolas, and over two terrabytes of MP3s catalogued by artist and style of music... and the prospect of hearing music that I've never heard before every single day for the rest of my life is nothing but joyful anticipation to me. Music is what we are doing all this for.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## 883dave

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The music is what matters. You should put together an optimal system and then listen to music. Equipment swapping is a waste of money and valuable time that could be better spent learning about music.

 See ya
 Steve_

 

Instead of this vague blathering, why don't you tell us what is the optimal system???

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_No, it's better to make an informed decision about what will produce the desired result instead of randomly swapping equipment in and out. I see absolutely no reason to go through five subwoofers, unless you're listening to music at ungodly levels.

 See ya
 Steve_

 

Again with the vague blathering...please enlighten us as to what is the optimal equipment?
 Just because "YOU" don't see going through five subwoofers, does this make it wrong for someone else to hear their music this way?

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I have over 8,000 CDs, tens of thousands of records going back 100 years, seven iPods packed with different kinds of music, two crank up Victrolas, and over two terrabytes of MP3s catalogued by artist and style of music... and the prospect of hearing music that I've never heard before every single day for the rest of my life is nothing but joyful anticipation to me. Music is what we are doing all this for.

 See ya
 Steve_

 

Sounds like you have a obsessive / compulsive disorder when it comes to music...


----------



## mark_h

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I have over 8,000 CDs, tens of thousands of records going back 100 years, seven iPods packed with different kinds of music, two crank up Victrolas, and over two terrabytes of MP3s catalogued by artist and style of music... and the prospect of hearing music that I've never heard before every single day for the rest of my life is nothing but joyful anticipation to me. Music is what we are doing all this for.

 See ya
 Steve_

 

I envy your collection! Some happy listening times


----------



## Jolida302

A little reflexion about power cords, related to Markl review:

 "Yeah, I know there’s all that non-audiophile-grade cabling in your walls preceding your fancy new power cord. And then from your walls back to the power plant are miles more."

 -It's better to use quality cable between your wall plug and the home "counter" (don't know if it's the right word), and i personnaly use dedicated power lines (3) with thicker diameter cooper for power amps. To separate digital from the rest is also very important as well, but we're off-topic. 

 -The septicks must be aware that the cable which bring power to your house is a very big diameter one, so much better than the thin ordinary one usually used. 
 If these big cables go underground, there are maybe less subject to the wave pollution, which is very important inside houses (but not only), maybe more than outdoor.


----------



## manofmathematics

Sometimes I don't understand. 

 This hobby is something that we should all be in together. Helping and supporting eachother, not judging and arguing with eachother. 

 Am I a cable guy? Yes, I am. Do I respect someone who believes in cables as I do more so than someone who doesn't? Absolutely not. 

 The one thing that we all have in common is the music. This is what we need to remember. The one collective goal we all share. We all just have our own unique ways of enjoying this collective goal. Some of us tweek, some of us don't. Some of us equipment swap, some of us don't. You get the idea. 

 Having our own separate opinions is ideal. It would be boring otherwise. It is when these opinions conflict and we lower ourselves to argue and judge that we are losing sight on what we are hear for in the first place. 

 The cable debate doesn't bother me in the least. Life would surely be a snore if we all just agreed, but maybe there is a way that we can add a little more respect towards one another. 

 Afterall, at the end of the day, we all just want our music. We just reached that end of the day in different ways.


----------



## UseName

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *edstrelow* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Maybe you could give some advice about somethings electrical but not about what a product sounds like without even seeing or hearing it. 

 Actually you kind of prove one of my points.

 The reason we don't get test results about things like cables is that the engineers who make them "know" what they will sound like without actual testing.

 They then forget to confirm the prediction by testing the product, or in this case listening to it.

 Basically "trust me I'm an engineer."

 You guys aren't going to change your ways so I do my own listening.




 This is grasping at straws. Obviously it made a difference to me, just trying to cut down on the word count. 

 Stop arguing and do some listening of your own. Then you might have something interesting to say._

 


 How about you read my whole post? 

 I said you were far too generic...saying someone probably doesn't have anything worthwhile to a product because they don't have hands-on experience is far too generic. That's it. Then I gave you an example. 

 Nowhere in my post did I say or imply 'trust me i am an engineer'. 

 Please read my entire post before you click the reply button.


----------



## UseName

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Kees* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Some people claim to be able to hear that there is no a difference. But how is an outside observer suppose to know if they actually do or not? 

 The placebo effect is very real and powerful... 
 And the fact that they are convinced beyond a shadow of doubt that there cannot be any difference to hear will make it even more powerful.
 now before someone feels insulted, please note that I didn't say if I was believer or a non-believer. I will also say that if you were one that was effected by the placebo effect, it doesn't make you 'stupid', 'ignorant' or 'gulible'... it's just makes you human._

 


 Thanks for proving my point. 

 Until people start testing in a scientific manor, these arguments will continue. Cable guys will continue to spend a a good % of there budget on cables, and the 'haters' will continue to think they are idiots for doing this. 

 Any argument without a fair trial is like arguing about whether blue is a better color than red.


----------



## oicdn

I just read an article in this months Hi-Fi magazine reviewing HDMI and hi-def audio cables from Monster Cables' lead man. Interesting read. I won't spoil anything, so you'll have to go pick it up, but it has some interesting facts in there and Monster Cables opinion on stuff...


----------



## Drag0n

Im having more fun watching people who cant type and spell try to convince people that theyre in the 98 or 99 percentile of IQ's ...lol.

 As far as cable, i already know it makes a difference. Its not always an improvement no matter what the cost of the cables.
 As far as a small 2" to 8" piece between my Zune and Amp on my portable, i cant say i hear a good enough difference (if any) to bother worrying about high priced cables for that,...but on my home speaker system, i definately hear a difference when i change to certain cables. I find the character of the cable comes out more in longer cables than in shorter ones.

 I have a Tara Labs cable that makes every system sound muddy. If i can find that tinny sounding Synergistic research cable i heard and had them together to switch between, i would bet people would hear a difference. If they dont hear it, then they never will and their ears are just very forgiving of changes in a system...period!
 Those are two extremes and you should be able to tell between them, and theres no voodoo involved, just wire. No box, no caps or coils or ferrite beads. 

 My dad hears no difference between the stock crappy system in his truck and mine. He just says mine has more bass and is louder.....he doesnt hear instrument separation and soundstage, air, etc.

 I dont believe in rediculously expensive cables, but i do believe in using better than the $2.00us stock cable that comes with a CD player, even if you buy a Radioshack or Monster cable.


----------



## meat01

Quote:


 Im having more fun watching people who cant type and spell try to convince people that theyre in the 98 or 99 percentile of IQ's ...lol. 
 

How about some apostrophes there 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 IQ has zero do do with spelling. There are brilliant people who can't spell worth a damn. It is a different part of the brain.


----------



## ethebull

Hmm, I bought a super speller plug-in upgrade for my brain from Compuserve. The instructions that came with it say it goes into the IQ-cortex, subport ecc188. Did I get screwed?


----------



## markl

Quote:


 No, it's better to make an informed decision about what will produce the desired result instead of randomly swapping equipment in and out. I see absolutely no reason to go through five subwoofers, unless you're listening to music at ungodly levels. 
 

 Nothing random at all, carefully researched, as far as that helps. I don't use the subs for music, it's for home theater. I had a dual subwoofer set-up at one point, hence the large number of subs. You can read all you want, get recommendations all you want from alleged know-it-alls like Mr. bigshot, but in the end, it's not his ears that are listening, his system it's blending into, nor his room in which it has to sound good.

 See ya.

 markl


----------



## edstrelow

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *sejarzo* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Quoting from the Kimber Kable web site:

"KIMBER KABLE products are created using our own OSCaR engineering process. OSCaR stands for Objective Subjective Correlation and Results. * Through this process we make the estimable and critical link between scientific measurements and listening impressions. * This process is aided in great measure by our exceptionally advanced test and research facility, which is regarded as one of the most well equipped in the audio industry. In addition, KIMBER KABLE also has a vast research library which allows our engineering team access to past research as well as the latest technologies."_

 

That would be great. Could end much of the bickering. However I don't see where these procedures and results are posted to see if they really hold water.


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *883dave* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Instead of this vague blathering_

 

You are really behaving like a jerk. Are you really a jerk or do you just play act being one on the internet?

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *markl* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You can read all you want, get recommendations all you want from alleged know-it-alls like Mr. bigsho_

 

How about keeping it to a generally respectful level. I think you can do it.

 How long did you keep each set of subwoofers? I hope some of those fell under the 30 day exchange period.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## markl

if you watch your tone, then I'll watch mine. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 It starts with one of those little boxes that hides under the sofa. Then goes to an 8" woofer. As you get more money and a larger space, you can experiment with dual subs and eventually the 12" sub I have now (tried a couple models). We're talking about purchases made over the course of 8-10 years, here.


 BTW, every post you make here takes you away from learning about more music.


----------



## dazzer1975

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Drag0n* 
_Im having more fun watching people who cant type and spell try to convince people that theyre in the 98 or 99 percentile of IQ's ...lol._

 


 Like meat said...

 However, in my case, I can spell, I just don't care enough to check what I am typing, especially on a forum, it doesn't matter enough to me.

 If people can understand what I mean that's all that I care about. "Most" people can do, however, as highlighted in this thread, there are some people out there, whatever their I.Q. with cognitive abilities ranking lower than an amoeba. Consequentially, they will reply to whatever they WANTED you to say, and not what you actually said.

 Again though, I wasn't trying to convince anybody about anything, simply pointing out the waste of time and effort I deem it to be to check my writing while on the internet.

 Like Meat pointed out again though, if you are going to pull someone up on their spelling or typing, it usually carries more credibility if you make no errors in your own post.

 This is besides the fact there could be any number of reasons for incorrect spelling or poor typing such as dyslexia, poor eyesight, faulty keyboard, or, in my case, I just don't give a ****, at least, not unless it is being marked. Unlike those who really care about what others think, I don't have a thing to prove to anyone, so how my lax attitude towards my typing comes across... ces't la vie.

 One day though you may take a more rounded and holistic view to life and people, at least, when you have grown up a bit.

 I will put it to down to you being young and naive, I mean that isn't patronising you is it? After all, thats why you can't discern any audible differences between cables... At least, that's how the argument goes, isn't it.


----------



## sejarzo

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *edstrelow* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_That would be great. Could end much of the bickering. However I don't see where these procedures and results are posted to see if they really hold water._

 

And how would you judge whether or not Kimber's protocols "hold water"?


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *markl* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_if you watch your tone, then I'll watch mine._

 

Tone is OK. It's name calling like "know it alls" that there's no place for.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *markl* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_BTW, every post you make here takes you away from learning about more music. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

My iPod gets fired up the second I wake up. The John Kirby sextette is playing for me right now jazzing Rigoletto. Kirby was a great bass player, but for some reason, his records favor the trumpet of Charlie Shavers and Kirby's bass is just about inaudible. Kirby is famous for writing the jazz standard "Undecided". Ella did a great version. That's our music moment for today.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## Akathisia

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *dazzer1975* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_blah blah blah....

*I don't have a thing to prove to anyone*

 ...blah blah blah_

 

Then drop it.


----------



## dazzer1975

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Akathisia* 
_Then drop it._

 


 I will always defend myself. I will also hold my hands up and apologise when I am in the wrong.


----------



## Wmcmanus

Is this thread still serving a useful purpose? Or have we now arrived at that point where (once again) the two camps have all arrived to the party and have set up their arguments, defenses, counter arguments, and counter defenses, and are now just circling each other's camps and slinging arrows? 

 In other words, is this thread helping anyone to better understand, appreciate, or even acknowledge the opposite perspective? Or is it (pretty much like any other cable debate) just annoying those people who are not themselves having fun engaging in arguments simply for the sake of it?


----------



## ethebull

"Stick a fork in their ass and turn them over, they're done"

 Lou Reed


----------



## 883dave

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You are really behaving like a jerk. Are you really a jerk or do you just play act being one on the internet?

 See ya
 Steve_

 

Only with know it all's like you.


----------



## mark_h

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Is this thread still serving a useful purpose?_

 

Nope


----------



## 3x331m

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *ethebull* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Hmm, I bought a super speller plug-in upgrade for my brain from Compuserve. The instructions that came with it say it goes into the IQ-cortex, subport ecc188. Did I get screwed?_

 

You're screwed if your ecc188 is not made by Telefunken...


----------



## Kees

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The music is what matters. You should put together an optimal system and then listen to music. Equipment swapping is a waste of money and valuable time that could be better spent learning about music.

 See ya
 Steve_

 

I find it quite enlightening how you present yourself here as a non-audiophile telling me what to do instead of enjoying my audiophile hobby.
 It tells me how to read and appreciate your posts.
 Thanks.

 See ya
 Kees.


----------



## Riboge

FYI: In response to my asking in the Members' Lounge today:
 Hey, Jude, Why Is There Still No Skeptics Forum?

 Jude replied:
 "Sorry, guys. I still want it, and it will be put up. Due to some big changes at work, I'm well behind on Head-Fi-related to-do's.

 I haven't forgotten about this one, though.

 Best Regards,
 Jude"

 It can't be soon enough!


----------



## Riordan

maybe at least some of the heat sweating up the once-cozy head-fi community would disperse if people realized that there are at least 3 distinct hobbies (*) involved in discussions like these:

 gear
 music
 internet discussion

 yes, we all share the hobby. but which one?




 (* the fourth being, of course, ers paper.)


----------



## Lord Chaos

The only thing I find really annoying about cable discussions and other such matters is how distracting they are for newcomers. Here comes someone who just wants better sound than she's getting with a boom box, and suddenly she's inundated with very detailed descriptions of esoteric concerns. Newcomers have to start somewhere so they have a means to figure out if they even need cable upgrades, and if so how to judge the differences.


----------



## 3x331m

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Lord Chaos* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The only thing I find really annoying about cable discussions and other such matters is how distracting they are for newcomers. Here comes someone who just wants better sound than she's getting with a boom box, and suddenly she's inundated with very detailed descriptions of esoteric concerns. Newcomers have to start somewhere so they have a means to figure out if they even need cable upgrades, and if so how to judge the differences._

 

I believe in differences in quality cables, but there is some snake oil in the mix. So, for my own guidance, I won't bother with cable upgrade unless I'm done with the rest of the system upgrade. Cables are ranked at the lowest priority in my systems upgrade strategy.


----------



## nick_charles

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Riboge* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_FYI: In response to my asking in the Members' Lounge today:
 Hey, Jude, Why Is There Still No Skeptics Forum?

 Jude replied:
 "Sorry, guys. I still want it, and it will be put up. Due to some big changes at work, I'm well behind on Head-Fi-related to-do's.

 I haven't forgotten about this one, though.

 Best Regards,
 Jude"

 It can't be soon enough!_

 

Personally I find this thread quite entertaining, when it doesnt sink down to personal insults. I find it odd that terms such as skeptic and believer be presented in absolute terms. I am very skeptical about some things, moderately skeptical about some other things and not very about other things. For instance I am okay with the belief that the sun will rise tomorrow, if it doesnt I will hardly care.

 Also I wonder about the utility of the term believer here. Does this mean a person with the belief that cables always make a difference or who believes that they _may_ make a difference. If they only "_may_" make a difference then the term believer looks as intellectually straight-jacketed as a cable atheist , while a skeptic should technically be a cable agnostic. Surely then even someone who calls themself a cable believer would need to be a little bit skeptical sometimes.


----------



## markl

Quote:


 The only thing I find really annoying about cable discussions and other such matters is how distracting they are for newcomers. Here comes someone who just wants better sound than she's getting with a boom box, and suddenly she's inundated with very detailed descriptions of esoteric concerns. Newcomers have to start somewhere so they have a means to figure out if they even need cable upgrades, and if so how to judge the differences. 
 

 Inundated? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 About cables? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 If anyone dares recommend a cable somewhere around here, the only inundation comes from skeptics "correcting" his or her idiotic sugestion.

 Anyway, what you express here is not the fault of the forum or the experienced audiophiles here. It is up to the reader to determine whether they are jumping in at addition and subtraction or reading about advanced trigonometry. This is really not that hard to do.

 You have walked into a big room with lots of conversations going on all at once completely unregulated by people from all walks of life and all ages. Why get upset when you stumble on a conversation that is going above your head at this point? It's not the fault of the room or the people having that discussion.


----------



## UseName

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Lord Chaos* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The only thing I find really annoying about cable discussions and other such matters is how distracting they are for newcomers. Here comes someone who just wants better sound than she's getting with a boom box, and suddenly she's inundated with very detailed descriptions of esoteric concerns. Newcomers have to start somewhere so they have a means to figure out if they even need cable upgrades, and if so how to judge the differences._

 

I actually don't think this is as big a deal as some people want to believe. Most newcomers will not enter this section of the forums. They are more interested in upgrading headphones, or adding amplifiers, ect. 

 As well, most people who are 'cable believers' say that cables are the last upgrade you should make.

 However, I do think it is a problem that skeptics will not be allowed to voice there opinion in this forum in the near future and will be forced to post in another section. This will ensure biased veiwpoints in BOTH forums, and no counter-arguments or discussions... it is also rather boring.


----------



## Akathisia

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *UseName* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I actually don't think this is as big a deal as some people want to believe. Most newcomers will not enter this section of the forums. They are more interested in upgrading headphones, or adding amplifiers, ect. 

 As well, most people who are 'cable believers' say that cables are the last upgrade you should make.

 However, I do think it is a problem that skeptics will not be allowed to voice there opinion in this forum in the near future and will be forced to post in another section. This will ensure biased veiwpoints in BOTH forums, and no counter-arguments or discussions... it is also rather boring._

 

But show me last thread you read here where people were allowed to compare notes about a specific product without being thrown into this SAME debate?


----------



## UseName

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *nick_charles* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Personally I find this thread quite entertaining, when it doesnt sink down to personal insults. I find it odd that terms such as skeptic and believer be presented in absolute terms. I am very skeptical about some things, moderately skeptical about some other things and not very about other things. For instance I am okay with the belief that the sun will rise tomorrow, if it doesnt I will hardly care.

 Also I wonder about the utility of the term believer here. Does this mean a person with the belief that cables always make a difference or who believes that they may make a difference. If they only "may" make a difference then the term believer looks as intellectually straight-jacketed as a cable atheist , while a skeptic should technically be a cable agnostic. Surely then even someone who calls themself a cable believer would need to be a little bit skeptical sometimes._

 

This is probably one of the best posts in the thread. 

 There is a difference between being rude and being skeptical. A skeptic simply hasn't seen enough evidence to agree with a certain opinion, and maybe they have seen only evidence to counter a posted opinion. Thus they are skeptical.


----------



## UseName

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Akathisia* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_But show me last thread you read here where people were allowed to compare notes about a specific product without being thrown into this SAME debate?_

 

I can't... there isn't enough evidence to make the majority of people agree on a specific side. Until this evidence comes to light, the debates will continue. 

 That said, I still don't see what the problem is posting a skeptical opinion on any product as long as the *post isn't rude and is on topic*. Just like I don't see a problem posting a positive review on a crappy product. If someone likes something, let them post about it. If someone doesn't like it let them post that too. 

 Don't send them off to another room because they post something you don't agree with. They took the time to post, let the post stand. As long as it is on topic.


----------



## Kees

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *UseName* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I can't... there isn't enough evidence to make the majority of people agree on a specific side. Until this evidence comes to light, the debates will continue. 

 That said, I still don't see what the problem is posting a skeptical opinion on any product as long as the *post isn't rude and is on topic*. Just like I don't see a problem posting a positive review on a crappy product. If someone likes something, let them post about it. If someone doesn't like it let them post that too. 

 Don't send them off to another room because they post something you don't agree with. They took the time to post, let the post stand. As long as it is on topic._

 

These post usually in fact deny there _is_ a topic. How more off topic can you get?
 And they are very often rude too.
 I don't think it is unreasonable to ask people who deny the very topic to please move.


----------



## Akathisia

I am going to start posting like crazy in every Grado thread, continuously stating that there is no way anyone could like them since they are so forward in treble bias... would that be fair?

 What I meant by the ability to discuss is this thread that I found (just an example of a discussion of a product with no BS debate) http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/vi...namics-195915/


----------



## stevenkelby

The anti-cable crew should be allowed to post whatever they like in a thread, *once*. Repeating the same point over and over on any topic should lead to a ban.


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Kees* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_These post usually in fact deny there is a topic. How more off topic can you get?
 And they are very often rude too._

 

The real problem here is not that there are "skeptics" or "believers" or whatever other inaccurate term one uses to label the opposing viewpoint. The real problem is that there is inexcusable lack of civility on both sides of the discussion. Segregating the participants on the basis of their point of view may stop that, but only because it will stop the discussion itself. In my view, that is antithetical to the very defintion of a "forum". I don't see how anyone could believe that it is in the best interests of Head-Fi to prohibit a discussion in the Cables forum that is directly relevant to the issue of cables and clearly of interest to a significant portion of our community. 

 The complaints of both sides of this debate could be addressed with a few relatively simple changes to the forum rules, without resorting to creating a separate forum whose express purpose is to eliminate discussion.


----------



## stevenkelby

I guess we need stricter moderation and enforcement of the rules but who's got time for that? People get away with breaking rules al teh time, offensive, insulting, inflammatory language, mentioning DBT etc.

 Last thing we want or need is more mods, but what else can we do?


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *stevenkelby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The anti-cable crew should be allowed to post whatever they like in a thread, *once*. Repeating the same point over and over on any topic should lead to a ban._

 

And why has to be always the skeptics, anticables, haters, or whatever you call them, the ones that has to be screwed while all they ask for, is an evidence, as they do not feel the same way? 

 IMO to post an opinion on something that is not substained by anything in earth, other that a very personal comment "I hear it", without offering any other input, and with a very closed mind, as to the point of dismissed the rest of the opinions, is IMO a lot more detestable attitude, than asking just for an evidence of the existance of such differences....
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 What is good for the goose, is for the gander, right?....


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *stevenkelby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Last thing we want or need is more mods, but what else can we do?_

 

My suggestion would be something along these lines. 

 We need to recognize that there are, by and large, essentially three types of discussions about cables that take place. 

 1. *Discussions that consist largely of subjective impressions of cables.* Markl's cable reviews are a good example of this type of thread, though a thread need not rise to the level of a formal review in order to fall within this category. People want to participate in these discussions to share their respective viewpoints regarding particular cables. However, those discussions tend to be disrupted by posts that address the issue of whether cables make a differences at all. Those discussions are almost invariably off-topic for the thread at hand, because the thread-starter and the other participants in those discussions have accepted that there is a difference without requiring rigorous scientific proof that an objective difference exists. There is no room in such a discussion for a call for double-blind testing, because the purpose of the discussion is not to prove that there is a difference, but to share purely subjective experiences. In my opinion, people should be able to have a discussion on that basis in the Cables forum.

 2. *Threads which discuss the topic of whether cables make a difference* and if so, the reasons for those differences (or the reason that no such differences exist). The people who participate in these threads want to be able to discuss the science behind cables, and such discussions necessarily include discussion of the methodologies for determining on an objective basis whether there are audible differences among cables. The merits of double-blind testing in the context of cables is a valid subject for discussion in such threads. In my opinion, people should be able to have a discussion on that basis in the Cables forum. 

 3. *Threads asking for recommendations.* These threads can arguably fall into one or both of the above categories.

 All of these types of discussion are relevant to the Cables forum and should not be relegated to some other forum. Instead, my proposal is that the Cables forum have the following rules:

_*The Golden Rule.* Respect the intent of the thread-starter._

 The Golden Rule can be implemented with the following specific rules:

 1. Discussion in the cables forum may include both discussion of the subjective impressions of cables as well as discussion of whether there are objective differences among cables.

 2. In threads that are started for the express purpose of sharing subjective impressions of cables, discussion of whether there is a difference among cables (including discussion of double-blind testing) is off-topic and therefore prohibited.

 3. In threads that are started for the express purpose of discussing whether there is a difference among cables or exploring the reasons for such differences, discussion of double-blind testing is acceptable.

 4. In threads seeking recommendations, discussion of whether there is a difference among cables is acceptable unless the thread-starter specifically requests otherwise, in which case participants in the thread must make a good faith effort to adhere to the scope of the thread as defined by the thread starter.

 5. In all instances, participants in the discussion must be respectful of other posters. 

 I also have some thoughts on how some of the existing issues can be addressed by the moderating staff to avoid imposing an undue burden on the staff, but I need to run and will post those later if anyone is interested.


----------



## IPodPJ

Sounds like a good plan, Febs. I personally like it. And some of the regular "cable bashers" might adhere to those guidelines (just as I'm sure a few won't). But how many newcomers actually read the TOS before posting?


----------



## 1117

My thing is, I just couldn't understand why someone would pay so much for a cable. I'm not saying there is or there isn't a difference (I haven't tested anything), but, IMHO, there is no point in buying $100+ cables when your rig is a simple one.

 For example, my main rig used to be an iriver H320 with a GoVibe V5.


 Seriously now, what business did I have buying $80+ interconnects? None whatsoever! So I didn't! Why? It's dumb FOR A RIG OF THAT CALIBER. The money would be better spent on headphones, or saving up for a source, etc.

 However, now that I have a freakin' Monarchy M24 AND a SinglePower Extreme connected to my PC via one of the best USB transports out there, the Trends Audio UD10.1... well! That's a beast combination right there! Even though I won't be doing any cable upgrades soon, I will definitely consider it in the future. (I did buy BJC's to connect everything, though)

 Even then, I expect no more than 10% improvements in sound. We shall see.

 In short, cable upgrades should be something left for the really last LAAAAST place. 

 Oh, and one more thing, regardless of whether you are a cable believer or not, anyone who spends more money on cables than anything else in the system is a complete and utter idiot.


----------



## Riboge

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_My suggestion would be something along these lines. 

 We need to recognize that there are, by and large, essentially three types of discussions about cables that take place. 

 1. *Discussions that consist largely of subjective impressions of cables.* Markl's cable reviews are a good example of this type of thread, though a thread need not rise to the level of a formal review in order to fall within this category. People want to participate in these discussions to share their respective viewpoints regarding particular cables. However, those discussions tend to be disrupted by posts that address the issue of whether cables make a differences at all. Those discussions are almost invariably off-topic for the thread at hand, because the thread-starter and the other participants in those discussions have accepted that there is a difference without requiring rigorous scientific proof that an objective difference exists. There is no room in such a discussion for a call for double-blind testing, because the purpose of the discussion is not to prove that there is a difference, but to share purely subjective experiences. In my opinion, people should be able to have a discussion on that basis in the Cables forum.

 2. *Threads which discuss the topic of whether cables make a difference* and if so, the reasons for those differences (or the reason that no such differences exist). The people who participate in these threads want to be able to discuss the science behind cables, and such discussions necessarily include discussion of the methodologies for determining on an objective basis whether there are audible differences among cables. The merits of double-blind testing in the context of cables is a valid subject for discussion in such threads. In my opinion, people should be able to have a discussion on that basis in the Cables forum. 

 3. *Threads asking for recommendations.* These threads can arguably fall into one or both of the above categories.

 All of these types of discussion are relevant to the Cables forum and should not be relegated to some other forum. Instead, my proposal is that the Cables forum have the following rules:

*The Golden Rule.* Respect the intent of the thread-starter.

 The Golden Rule can be implemented with the following specific rules:

 1. Discussion in the cables forum may include both discussion of the subjective impressions of cables as well as discussion of whether there are objective differences among cables.

 2. In threads that are started for the express purpose of sharing subjective impressions of cables, discussion of whether there is a difference among cables (including discussion of double-blind testing) is off-topic and therefore prohibited.

 3. In threads that are started for the express purpose of discussing whether there is a difference among cables or exploring the reasons for such differences, discussion of double-blind testing is acceptable.

 4. In threads seeking recommendations, discussion of whether there is a difference among cables is acceptable unless the thread-starter specifically requests otherwise, in which case participants in the thread must make a good faith effort to adhere to the scope of the thread as defined by the thread starter.

 5. In all instances, participants in the discussion must be respectful of other posters. 

 I also have some thoughts on how some of the existing issues can be addressed by the moderating staff to avoid imposing an undue burden on the staff, but I need to run and will post those later if anyone is interested._

 

This is a lot like a proposal I made several months ago to deal with this situation, so I surely get the logic of it. Yet there is just no evidence that such a set of rules would be heeded or adequately policed. And maybe more importantly the definitions and typology of topics you offer is far from clear or non-controversial. For instance, I just refuse to accept "subjective impressions" as synonymous with what audiophiles hear and want to present and learn of about the experiences of others. And, I would maintain, any request for advice about which cable to get or the like is clearly premised on the idea that a choice among them makes a difference, so the op cannot meaningfully specify such a thread to be 'objective' or only for advice not based on what the cables in question sound like. The answer to such, in so far as it has any meaning, always is to get the cheaper one. Surely that has been demonstrated sufficiently.

 So these two types belong in a cable forum. The third type about whether cables are different, etc, notwithstanding the experience of many belongs in a scientific research oriented forum. That sounds like the skeptics forum to me. I just don't know why some think there would be nothing to say there. The issues of how to measure what interests audiophiles, how to test and substantiate about various phenomena involved, etc, seem to me interesting, valuable and relatively inexhaustible. This is a very different sort of enterprise from the other two which are about listening not experimenting or what instruments have to say. So why is that not best pursued separately and differently?


----------



## ethebull

I’m going to boycott New York strip steak in favor of ground chuck until it is scientifically proven through empirical measure that the NY steak is superior.

 I mean really your stupid heads, they are both made of cow! An incomprehensible number of fools here seem to think that texture and flavor some how enhance the eating experience. Such nonsense.


----------



## stevenkelby

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_And why has to be always the skeptics, anticables, haters, or whatever you call them, the ones that has to be screwed while all they ask for, is an evidence, as they do not feel the same way? 

 IMO to post an opinion on something that is not substained by anything in earth, other that a very personal comment "I hear it", without offering any other input, and with a very closed mind, as to the point of dismissed the rest of the opinions, is IMO a lot more detestable attitude, than asking just for an evidence of the existance of such differences....
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 What is good for the goose, is for the gander, right?....
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

You're right of course. Same goes for the pro-cable crew, or anyone else, with any topic. Certain behaviour is allowed and some is not. You can mak your point, any point, but keep going on about it, that's a paddling.


----------



## stevenkelby

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *1117* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_anyone who spends more money on cables than anything else in the system is a complete and utter idiot._

 

Regardless of your other "points", and whether it's right or wrong, this is exactly the kind of rule-breaking that would lead to a 24 hour ban if I were a mod.

 Ban length would increase exponentially with subsequent offences.


----------



## 3x331m

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *1117* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_anyone who spends more money on cables than anything else in the system is a complete and utter idiot._

 

 Quote:


  Originally Posted by *stevenkelby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Regardless of your other "points", and whether it's right or wrong, this is exactly the kind of rule-breaking that would lead to a 24 hour ban if I were a mod.

 Ban length would increase exponentially with subsequent offences._

 

Please explain why you think the statement from 1117 was an offence? and why do you want to ban him/her ?


----------



## gotchaforce

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *stevenkelby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Regardless of your other "points", and whether it's right or wrong, this is exactly the kind of rule-breaking that would lead to a 24 hour ban if I were a mod.

 Ban length would increase exponentially with subsequent offences._

 

Is that so? tell us more about what you would do if you were a mod, its really interesting, just like all armchair moderation


----------



## Akathisia

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *stevenkelby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Regardless of your other "points", and whether it's right or wrong, this is exactly the kind of rule-breaking that would lead to a 24 hour ban if I were a mod.

 Ban length would increase exponentially with subsequent offences._

 

x2


----------



## gotchaforce

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Akathisia* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_x2_

 

Do you understand the economic PRINCIPLE of "diminishing returns"

 yes or no?


----------



## Drag0n

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *dazzer1975* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Like meat said...

 However, in my case, I can spell, I just don't care enough to check what I am typing, especially on a forum, it doesn't matter enough to me.

 If people can understand what I mean that's all that I care about. "Most" people can do, however, as highlighted in this thread, there are some people out there, whatever their I.Q. with cognitive abilities ranking lower than an amoeba. Consequentially, they will reply to whatever they WANTED you to say, and not what you actually said.

 Again though, I wasn't trying to convince anybody about anything, simply pointing out the waste of time and effort I deem it to be to check my writing while on the internet.

 Like Meat pointed out again though, if you are going to pull someone up on their spelling or typing, it usually carries more credibility if you make no errors in your own post.

 This is besides the fact there could be any number of reasons for incorrect spelling or poor typing such as dyslexia, poor eyesight, faulty keyboard, or, in my case, I just don't give a ****, at least, not unless it is being marked. Unlike those who really care about what others think, I don't have a thing to prove to anyone, so how my lax attitude towards my typing comes across... ces't la vie.

 One day though you may take a more rounded and holistic view to life and people, at least, when you have grown up a bit.

 I will put it to down to you being young and naive, I mean that isn't patronising you is it? After all, thats why you can't discern any audible differences between cables... At least, that's how the argument goes, isn't it._

 


 But you care that we all know your IQ, whatever.
 Also im not young and naive, im 44.
 And if you read my post, i never said anything at all about me not being able to discern differences in cables. I believe in cable differences, but i dont believe in spending $1000's for them.
 As far as having credibility in my own post by spelling correctly etc., i never claimed to have a super-human 99 percentile IQ. This thread is about cables, and i dont care what anybodys IQ is really.


----------



## ethebull

I have a bucket of pennies from pocket change. Last month I pulled the bucket out of the closet and made about $10 in rolls to bring to the bank. The bucket sat outside my closet door the past few weeks…

 I just caught my dog with her nose in the bucket. The penny level is down a good two inches! 

 Any interested parties who want triple processed copper for manufacturing ultra premium cables, feel free to PM me.


----------



## 3x331m

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *ethebull* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I have a bucket of pennies from pocket change. Last month I pulled the bucket out of the closet and made about $10 in rolls to bring to the bank. The bucket sat outside my closet door the past few weeks…

 I just caught my dog with her nose in the bucket. The penny level is down a good two inches! 

 Any interested parties who want triple processed copper for manufacturing ultra premium cables, feel free to PM me._

 

Are you being sarcastic ? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 I don't think anyone wants your penny. It cost to much to recycle and refine your penny into six-sigma oxygen-free copper. Anyway, I prefer silver to copper. So, you might have to wait for awhile for the next customer.


----------



## stevenkelby

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *3x331m* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Please explain why you think the statement from 1117 was an offence? and why do you want to ban him/her ?_

 

Personally, I didn't find it offensive, I don't know the guy and I'm sure he's great, but I think it was an offence against the TOS here, clearly a blanket statement calling people complete and utter idiots is not what anyone wants here, unless you think that it should be aceptable?

 This is quite apart from the point of the post, which is neither here nor there. It's "offensive" manner that deserves a short ban.

 I don't think it should be acceptable. Of course I'm as guilty as the next man and have probably posted similar comments myself, but I think it's wrong and shoul be "moderated" against. Short bans area good way of dealing with it IMO. It makes the poster realize that it's unacceptable and discourages a repeat performance. 

 I would gladly take a short ban to remind me not to behave in certain ways.

 Al the rules in the world are useless if you don't enforce them, and clearly our current rules are not enforced. I'm sure there are good reasons they are not enforced strictly, but that wasn't my point either.

 I sure would not want to be a mod, I'd be crap at it, but if it were up to me to mke these decisions (which it's not), the above is what would happen in this particular forum (head-fi). 

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *gotchaforce* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Is that so? tell us more about what you would do if you were a mod, its really interesting, just like all armchair moderation_

 

I don't know, I haven't got any other ideas. Just giving my opinion, exactly the same as you. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Ethebull, I'l take the pennies, how much for shipping?


----------



## sacd lover

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *ethebull* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I’m going to boycott New York strip steak in favor of ground chuck until it is scientifically proven through empirical measure that the NY steak is superior.

 I mean really your stupid heads, they are both made of cow! An incomprehensible number of fools here seem to think that texture and flavor some how enhance the eating experience. Such nonsense._

 

LOL! Good one.


----------



## cosmopragma

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Riboge* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_FYI: In response to my asking in the Members' Lounge today:
 Hey, Jude, Why Is There Still No Skeptics Forum?

 Jude replied:
 "Sorry, guys. I still want it, and it will be put up. Due to some big changes at work, I'm well behind on Head-Fi-related to-do's.

 I haven't forgotten about this one, though.

 Best Regards,
 Jude"

 It can't be soon enough!_

 

Well, seems it's true then that the powers in charge are planning the kiss of death.
 You can't await hard censorship and a ban of reason?
 I'd like to spend some of my books then for your celebration party.I guess my modest scientific library would be appropriate.
 Into the fire with the crap .........

 When I heard rumors about it at first I couldn't believe it and I even defended head-fi (as always) when some audiophiles at an european forum told me that "the americans" are basically planning to outlaw reason.

 From a commercial point of view this isn't a bad move since the snake oil companies will love it, but for most people with an european mind set such a kind of censorship is totally unacceptable.

 This will reduce head-fi to a market place, some voodoo priest wannabees in lala land and lots of newbies.The equivalent of a religious sect.

 I'm seriously disgusted and I'm probably out of here.


 It feels like leaving a once loved woman, but it's over.


----------



## ethebull

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *stevenkelby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Ethebull, I'l take the pennies, how much for shipping?_

 

It will take some time to retrieve the processed pennies from the back yard. It will save you some money if I just ship them “as is”. Of course shipping would be a bit higher… Might be a wash.


----------



## Akathisia

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *gotchaforce* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Do you understand the economic PRINCIPLE of "diminishing returns"

 yes or no?_

 

edit : nm. I don't even know how to respond this asinine question.


----------



## stevenkelby

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *cosmopragma* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Well, seems it's true then that the powers in charge are planning the kiss of death.
 You can't await hard censorship and a ban of reason?
 I'd like to spend some of my books then for your celebration party.I guess my modest scientific library would be appropriate.
 Into the fire with the crap .........

 When I heard rumors about it at first I couldn't believe it and I even defended head-fi (as always) when some audiophiles at an european forum told me that "the americans" are basically planning to outlaw reason.

 From a commercial point of view this isn't a bad move since the snake oil companies will love it, but for most people with an european mind set such a kind of censorship is totally unacceptable.

 This will reduce head-fi to a market place, some voodoo priest wannabees in lala land and lots of newbies.The equivalent of a religious sect.

 I'm seriously disgusted and I'm probably out of here.


 It feels like leaving a once loved woman, but it's over._

 

I'm with you on that Uwe, I think anyone should be allowed to post their POV, or a dissenting attitued, we need that. 

 However some people go way too far and have ruined head-fi for some people (not the newbies you refer to, but the others, the people that sadly don't post much anymore).

 Do you agree that there is something wrong with th present situation, where people can't discuss these things without being insulted as "complete idiots", to quote a post on the last page?

 Hav you got any other ideas to fix it?

 I like Febs' ideas but they need enforcing, how do we do that? 

 Ideas?


----------



## stevenkelby

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *ethebull* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_It will take some time to retrieve the processed pennies from the back yard. It will save you some money if I just ship them “as is”. Of course shipping would be a bit higher… Might be a wash._

 

Just send the dog.


----------



## Wmcmanus

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *cosmopragma* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Well, seems it's true then that the powers in charge are planning the kiss of death.
 You can't await hard censorship and a ban of reason?
 I'd like to spend some of my books then for your celebration party.I guess my modest scientific library would be appropriate.
 Into the fire with the crap .........

 When I heard rumors about it at first I couldn't believe it and I even defended head-fi (as always) when some audiophiles at an european forum told me that "the americans" are basically planning to outlaw reason.

 From a commercial point of view this isn't a bad move since the snake oil companies will love it, but for most people with an european mind set such a kind of censorship is totally unacceptable._

 

Sorry our American mindest doesn't meet your standards. 

 What exactly is being proposed that you would regard as censorship and the outlaw of reason? Oh, I've got it. You must think that the idea of moving the "great debate" threads about whether cables "can" make a difference into a separate forum would be a bad thing. You would prefer that we engage in the same dialogue in each and every thread that is ever started about cables. Ohhhh kayyyyy...

  Quote:


 This will reduce head-fi to a market place, some voodoo priest wannabees in lala land and lots of newbies.The equivalent of a religious sect. 
 

Owl Rly - StoneHome
  Quote:


 I'm seriously disgusted and I'm probably out of here.


 It feels like leaving a once loved woman, but it's over. 
 

Gee, we'll miss you. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I'm sure you've broken the hearts of many lovely women.

 So you're leaving Head-Fi because we're planning to separate the cables forum into two sub forums such that everyone can say whatever it is they want to say, but in appropriate threads that are designed to encourage such discussions, rather than in any old thread they want to crap in.


----------



## Wmcmanus

Again, I ask the question: is this thread still serving a productive purpose? 

 I see several people trying their best to bring reason to the discussion and actually searching for workable solutions to the problem. For their sake, I hesitate to close the thread because maybe some of the things they've been suggesting will prove to be helpful as we move forward in whatever direction the cables forum(s) ultimately takes. 

 Yet, so much of what I'm seeing in this thread, like so many other threads about the same topic, is just argument for the sake of argument, and that really gets tiring. It doesn't help matters at all, and only serves to frustrate and alienate people more than ever. This is why, IMO, the two distinct camps need to be separated via the sub forum mechanism that we intend to put in place (soon, hopefully). It won't eliminate discussions about whether cables "can" make a difference; it will simply relocate these discussions, and all related topics, to a place where people actually want to talk about such things!


----------



## vcoheda

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Again, I ask the question: is this thread still serving a productive purpose?_

 

unfortunately, few to any threads in this part of the forum ever serve a productive purpose.


----------



## IPodPJ

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *1117* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_In short, cable upgrades should be something left for the really last LAAAAST place. 

 Oh, and one more thing, regardless of whether you are a cable believer or not, anyone who spends more money on cables than anything else in the system is a complete and utter idiot._

 

Who died and made you "king of audiophilia"? If someone gets enjoyment out of their system and takes a different upgrade path than you would take, how does that make them an idiot? Because 1117 said so?? Get ahold of your ego, buddy.

 Most of us who own high-end cables and/or power cords didn't believe in them at one point, too. But once we did listen with our own ears, we understood what all the fuss was about. Obviously you've never even listened to a high-end cable or power cord so why on earth would anyone take your advice seriously? Arrogance stemming from ignorance is one of the worst traits someone could possess so I hope for your sake that you address it soon.


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Riboge* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Yet there is just no evidence that such a set of rules would be heeded or adequately policed._

 

Perhaps that is so, but there is ample evidence that the rules of this forum as they currently exist are ineffective. Some members are frustrated because they cannot discuss how cables sound. Others are frustrated because they cannot discuss how cables can be tested. This has led to elevated levels of frustration on all sides of the issue, and as a result, the moderators are frustrated because _all_ threads end up requiring heavy moderation. In fact, you yourself started a thread today in which you advocated that everyone "stop posting in any of the forums ... if no solution is implemented." In short, no-one is happy with the current state of affairs. Thus, I would submit that there is no downside to my proposal.

  Quote:


 For instance, I just refuse to accept "subjective impressions" as synonymous with what audiophiles hear and want to present and learn of about the experiences of others. 
 

I honestly have no idea what you mean by this. Could you elaborate?

  Quote:


 So these two types belong in a cable forum. The third type about whether cables are different, etc, notwithstanding the experience of many belongs in a scientific research oriented forum. That sounds like the skeptics forum to me. I just don't know why some think there would be nothing to say there. The issues of how to measure what interests audiophiles, how to test and substantiate about various phenomena involved, etc, seem to me interesting, valuable and relatively inexhaustible. This is a very different sort of enterprise from the other two which are about listening not experimenting or what instruments have to say. So why is that not best pursued separately and differently? 
 

By your logic, a thread that discussed the build quality of cables should also be in a separate forum because it is about build quality and not listening. Discussions regarding the scientific principles that impact the sound of cables are indisputably discussions about cables. Those discussions can be pursued separately from discussions about listening experiences without relegating them to some forum other than the Cable forum as if they had nothing to do with cables at all.


----------



## stevenkelby

Febs,

 How do you propose policing and enforcing any set of rules?


----------



## UseName

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Again, I ask the question: is this thread still serving a productive purpose? 

 I see several people trying their best to bring reason to the discussion and actually searching for workable solutions to the problem. For their sake, I hesitate to close the thread because maybe some of the things they've been suggesting will prove to be helpful as we move forward in whatever direction the cables forum(s) ultimately takes. 

 Yet, so much of what I'm seeing in this thread, like so many other threads about the same topic, is just argument for the sake of argument, and that really gets tiring. It doesn't help matters at all, and only serves to frustrate and alienate people more than ever. This is why, IMO, the two distinct camps need to be separated via the sub forum mechanism that we intend to put in place (soon, hopefully). It won't eliminate discussions about whether cables "can" make a difference; it will simply relocate these discussions, and all related topics, to a place where people actually want to talk about such things!_

 

I can't disagree with this more... you *don't* want to alienate people but you want *separate* sub-forums for differing opinions?? Seems like it's a much better way to alienate people. Of course, I am new here... so what do I know. 

 As far as this thread serving a purpose, well.... it seems like a pretty hot topic. Maybe you, personally have exhausted by these discussions but it looks like the majority of the people in this thread are not. Otherwise, they would not post here. 

 So... either the bulk of the people participating in this thread are getting something from it, or they are morons for wasting their time. Nobody is being extremely rude, and the thread was started for this reason. 

 Please let us have our fun.


----------



## UseName

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *stevenkelby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Febs,

 How do you propose policing and enforcing any set of rules?_

 

Good point. Also, how do you plan on policing 2 separate subforums and make sure that those with certain opinions are posting in the appropriate sub forum. 

 Seems like it would be a lot of work...


----------



## UseName

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *IPodPJ* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Who died and made you "king of audiophilia"? If someone gets enjoyment out of their system and takes a different upgrade path than you would take, how does that make them an idiot? Because 1117 said so?? Get ahold of your ego, buddy.

 Most of us who own high-end cables and/or power cords didn't believe in them at one point, too. But once we did listen with our own ears, we understood what all the fuss was about. *Obviously you've never even listened to a high-end cable or power cord so why on earth would anyone take your advice seriously? Arrogance stemming from ignorance is one of the worst traits someone could possess so I hope for your sake that you address it soon.*_

 

I agree with your first part, but not the bolded section. You are doing the same thing you are arguing against in the first part of your post. 

 I use to believe in high end power cords for car audio, Just like you. But once I was subjected to a blind test... I couldn't tell the difference. I felt a little foolish that I was proven wrong, but that was my experience. 

 Saying someone *obviously* has no experience with high-end cable is equally ignorant as 1117's post. I could say something simular about you _obviously_ having no experience with a blind test. But that would also be equally ignorant as I have no idea what your experience is...


----------



## Uncle Erik

Personal attacks are the real problem. If a hard line was drawn there, it would settle most of the animosity.

 Separating the debate isn't going to change much. Debates will spill over into the "non-believer" forum, just like it is here.

 And what happens if a skeptic actually buys a cable and hears no difference? Will you only be allowed to post in the cable forum if you actually hear a difference? What if two people disagree about the sound? Will one of them have their posts deleted if they don't heel to the orthodoxy? This is a very, very difficult line to draw.

 That's why I think a crackdown on personal insults would be best.

 I understand there used to be a problem with threadcrapping in the Music Forum, as well. People who didn't like certain genres and bands would get into debates.

 That's mostly gone now. Why not the same rules here?


----------



## IPodPJ

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *UseName* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Saying someone obviously has no experience with high-end cable is equally ignorant as 1117's post._

 

If you had read his post carefully, you would see that it is, in fact, quite obvious.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *UseName* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_or they are morons for wasting their time. 

 Please let us have our fun._

 

Time for a self-explanatory 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 You are doing exactly the same thing that the other guy did.

 Perhaps you should familiarize yourself with this:
Head-Fi Posting Rules and Terms of Use


----------



## Arainach

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *nick_charles* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Also I wonder about the utility of the term believer here. Does this mean a person with the belief that cables always make a difference or who believes that they may make a difference. If they only "may" make a difference then the term believer looks as intellectually straight-jacketed as a cable atheist , while a skeptic should technically be a cable agnostic. Surely then even someone who calls themself a cable believer would need to be a little bit skeptical sometimes._

 

Ah, the age-old analogy wrongly used as always. Theism (belief in a deity) and Gnosticm are totally separate ideas. Thus, one is either a theistic agnostic or an atheistic agnostic; the term "agnostic" isn't some sort of middle ground.

 Back to your actual analogy, it's not "atheists" and "believers" with skepticism as some noble middle ground. In general, either side should have a bit of skepticism. Quote:


  Originally Posted by *stevenkelby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Febs,

 How do you propose policing and enforcing any set of rules?_

 

The same way we enforce the current ones: Moderators. If the workload's too high, get more. There are plenty of respected posters who don't have that title yet to offer such positions to.


----------



## stevenkelby

As usual Uncle Eric is the voice of reason.

 Here's the facts as I see it, let me know if you disagree please.

 1. The current situation is not working.

 2. We have rules here that would work if enforced.

 3. They aren't enforced.

 So, what's the answer?

 Obviously, enforce the rules!

 Rules that are not enforced are just guidelines.

 I wish Jude or a mod or someone would clearly state the rules and the penalty for breaking the rules, and stick to it.

 It would police itself. If I see the word "idiot" or "moron" used offensively, I would use the good old "!!" button to my left over there, and I'm sure mods could get on the case right away, the ones we have are good enough and numerous enough to respond to those alerts.

 As I suggested, instant bans are a good deterrent. Short at first, getting longer for every offense.

 Anyone got any better ideas?

 As a side note, I read a quote today "Don't become the thing you hate". Happens all to easily as evidenced above. I've done it too. A slap on the wrist would help us learn!


----------



## 1117

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *IPodPJ* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_If you had read his post carefully, you would see that it is, in fact, quite obvious.



 Time for a self-explanatory 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 You are doing exactly the same thing that the other guy did.

 Perhaps you should familiarize yourself with this:
Head-Fi Posting Rules and Terms of Use_

 

Well, time for a self-explanatory here too, I'm afraid. First of all, I am quite sure I NEVER said cables did not make a difference. I actually admitted to the possibility of it though I have not had chances of extensive "cable rolling" myself. 

 However, I do fear that part out of my post was taken out of context.

 Granted, I overstepped my bounds when I said the word idiot, but WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF MY ENTIRE POST, it can clearly be seen that what I meant is that for beginners and their rigs, it is more favorable to concentrate on upgrading the sources, headphones, etc. FIRST.

 I have been following the whole cable debate for a while, and it does intrigue me a lot. However, I have seen that the concensus (between both advocates and "haters"), is that money spent first on upgrading sources, amplifiers, headphones, etc. is more important than upgrading cables.

 If we cannot agree on this, then I will silently step out of this section of the forum forever. 

 Example:
 Someone buys earbuds, spents $300 recabling them with high-grade stuff (a V2 or V3 cable). Did this person make a good choice? No. This person would have gotten HIGHER GAINS by investing in $300 headphones to begin with.

 This is an extreme case, but it goes to prove my point that there has to be some sense to "the path taken when upgrading." I think everyone would agree with the example above (if you don't, then, well, I just don't know what to say to you). Thus, this is the crux of my argument: it is better to spend money on those things that RETURN A HIGHER GAIN first.

 Correct me if I am wrong, but for most, the natural order of progression seems to be:
 1)headphones
 2)source
 3)amplifier
 4)external dac
 5)cables

 #2, #3, and #4 are sometimes interchangeable, but most people put headphones at the top of the list in terms of changing what you hear. Thus, also top on the list as far as returning higher gains for your money out of all the components in a rig.

 I hope we can agree on this. 

 Now, even headphones fall into the arena of diminishing returns. This is a fact and I hope everyone can agree to this. Now, if even headphones are subject to this diminishing returns phenomenon, certainly everything else on the list is as well, am I right? I hope we can agree on this too. If so, then, as we head down the list, cables will have the "worst" ratio in terms of diminishing returns out of all the components. I put "worst" in quotes not to mean it in a negative way, but in the sense that the other components fare better in the department of diminishing returns.

 There needs to be some sort of structure in the upgrading path, and it is because of that lack of structure that sometimes "newbies" make threads in sadness complaining how they can't hear any difference when using such and such rig component with such and such setup.

 I hope it is clear as to where I am going with this.

 Anyhow, I could elaborate further, but I think the point has been established sufficiently that I do not need ramble any further.

 I hope this clarifies my first post.

 Thus, when read in context, it can be seen why I used the word "idiot" even though perhaps another word should have been used in its place.

 Now, as far as this post itself, I have not attacked anyone personally, nor did I in the first post I made IF TAKEN WITHIN CONTEXT. Thus, I don't know why subsequent posts became personal.

 But that's the nature of the internet beast, and I learned that a long time ago, so it bothers me none.


----------



## stevenkelby

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *1117* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_for beginners and their rigs, it is more favorable to concentrate on upgrading the sources, headphones, etc. FIRST._

 

Much better. Apology accepted. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 The rest is all true and fair enough.


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *stevenkelby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_As usual Uncle Eric is the voice of reason.

 Here's the facts as I see it, let me know if you disagree please.

 1. The current situation is not working.

 2. We have rules here that would work if enforced.

 3. They aren't enforced.

 So, what's the answer?

 Obviously, enforce the rules!_

 

I agree in part and disagree in part. I think that the existing rules regarding personal attacks can be effective if enforced. However, the existing prohibition against discussion of double-blind testing is not effective for its intended purpose.

*Regarding personal attacks. *I think that Uncle Eric is right that eliminating personal attacks would eliminate much of the problem, but we must recognize that personal attacks are made by people on all sides of the issue, and not just by the so-called skeptics. As I said in my initial post in this thread, the heart of the problem is that there is an inexcusable lack of civility in the discussion, and that lack of civility is not limited to the so-called "skeptics" or the so-called "believers." It is easy to recognize that certain types of posts are improper. For example, if someone writes, "you are an idiot," that post clearly violates the existing guidelines, and by and large, I think that the moderators here do a very good job of handling those types of posts. I don't know that I would go so far as to impose instant bans on people for those types of posts, but I think that it would make sense to give a warning (vBulletin has a warning feature that might work for this), delete the post, and then impose a ban on subsequent offenses.

 There is a more subtle form of uncivility, however, that goes largely unchecked in these discussions, and that is the indirect attack, such as the following:

 "Anyone who believes that cables have a certain sound is brain dead."

 "The skeptics should have their own kiddie pool."

 These types of posts add nothing productive to the discussion and almost invariably lead to a counterattack, which then leads the original poster to say something along the lines of, "show me where I attacked anyone." While it is true that the attack was not directed to a specific person, the fact is that the purpose of the post was to demean others on the basis of their belief or a position that they have taken, and even though the inflammatory statement was not directed to a particular individual, it is nevertheless an attack on a the participants in the discussion, rather than an attack on the positions held by the participants. 

 Before hitting the "submit reply" button, everyone should be required to review their post and ask himself or herself this question: "Am I attacking the message, or am I attacking the messenger." If it is the former, submit the reply. If it is the latter, don't. It is that simple.

*Regarding discussion of double-blind testing.* As I noted above and in my longer post earlier in the thread, I think that the prohibition regarding discussion of double-blind testing misses the mark and does not serve its intended purpose. The rule appears to be intended to prevent discussions of cable listening experiences to be disrupted by those who claim that there are no differences among cables at all and demand proof. However, the rule simply does not achieve that purpose. Discussions of individual listening experiences continue to be disrupted, in spite of the prohibition of double-blind testing. 

 Moreover, the rule stifles discussion in threads where discussion of DBT should be permitted (i.e., those threads whose express purpose is to discuss whether cables make a difference, as opposed to those threads whose purpose is to share individual listening experiences and impressions). The "no DBT" rule negatively impacts the discussion in those threads in two ways. First, to the extent that participants in those threads adhere to the rule, they are unable to discuss a methodology that is well-accepted in the scientific community for evaluating whether there are differences. Second, to the extent that the participants do not adhere to the rule and discuss DBT anyway, there are invariably people who raise the rule and then the discussion turns away from its substance and degenerates into what Wayne accurately characterizes as an argument about arguing.

 Thus, my suggestion as I noted above is to eliminate the "no DBT" rule and replace it with a rule that more directly addresses the specific problem of thread-crapping in listening impression threads, without stifling the discussion in other cable-related threads.

*Suggestions for moderating cable threads. *I want to tread lightly with this next comment because I have a great respect for the moderating staff here, and as a moderator of several other forums, I know how hard they work and how difficult and thankless their job can be. However, my observation over the course of several years of reading and participating in this forum (and I read far more than I post here) is that the moderators tend to be more tolerant of the types of indirect attacks that I described above when they come from cable proponents than when they come from cable skeptics. I've also noticed certain instances where the moderators themselves make those sorts of indirect attacks or inflammatory statements. I think that in almost all instances, this is not intentional; moderators are just as human as any of the rest of us, and they have their own opinions on the subjects that are discussed in these threads and they have the right to express those opinions, and they sometimes make aggressive posts in the heat of discussion, just like the rest of us. Unfortunately, however, when a moderator participates vigorously on one side of the discussion _and_ simultaneously moderates a thread, that can lead to the perception that there is not a level playing field for the discussion. Is that perception accurate? I'm not sure that it matters. In the legal profession, for example, we have certain rules that govern the conduct of judges. Those rules in many instances will require judges to recuse themselves from hearing a case not only when there is an actual conflict of interest, but also when there is a situation that creates the appearance of impropriety, even if an actual conflict does not exist.

 So, with these things in mind, I would offer a couple of suggestions for the moderating staff:

 First, consider appointing a moderator from among the so-called skeptics.[1] I'm sure that you have a moderator's forum where you discuss how problems are to be handled, and I think it would be useful to have someone who can lend insight into the skeptics' position. No, I am not volunteering for this position, but there are quite of few "so-called" skeptics who are quite reasonable and respected here, and who would make excellent moderators. Perhaps having one of these members included in the staff would cause the problematic skeptics to pay more attention to the rules, but even if that is not the case, the problematic skeptics would be hard-pressed to complain that they were treated unfairly if one of the people making the decision shares their point of view.

 Second, consider adopting a policy whereby moderators do not moderate discussions in which they are actively engaged as a participant. I am *not* suggesting that moderators should not participate in these discussions, but only that if they choose to participant, they defer to one of the other moderators to police the thread. When I was actively moderating Mistic River, if I was personally participating in a thread and an issue arose in that thread, I would PM one of the other moderators and ask him to step in. Obviously, that wouldn't be necessary if there were a clear cut violation of the rules; for example, I wouldn't hesitate to delete a post filled with a string of profanity even if I were participating in the thread, but if there were an issue that involved a judgment call, that issue was often better resolved by someone not directly involved in the discussion.

 To the moderators: I just want to reiterate that these suggestions are not intended to be an indictment of the fine work that you are doing, but are offered as constructive suggestions for improvement of the community. Whether or not you choose to accept any of the suggestions, thank you for reading and considering them.
 _______________________

 [1] I hate the terms "skeptics" and "believers," which are too often used by someone who considers himself to be a member of one group to disparage another participant in the discussion by implying that one must be either one or the other and cannot be both. However, I use that term here for convenience.]


----------



## UseName

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *IPodPJ* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_If you had read his post carefully, you would see that it is, in fact, quite obvious.



 Time for a self-explanatory 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 You are doing exactly the same thing that the other guy did.

 Perhaps you should familiarize yourself with this:
Head-Fi Posting Rules and Terms of Use_

 

It's not obvious, he comes right out and says it. You never quoted that part and I must have missed it... so I apologize for that. 

 I wasn't calling anyone any names. If you notice how my post was worded, I never called anyone a name. I simply was pointing out that nobody would post in this thread unless they saw some value in it, whatever that may be. I certainly don't see myself as a moron, so I certainly don't think anyone in this thread is a moron.... or in this forum. 

 I was simply stating my opinion that the act of taking personal time to post is moronic, if one does not get anything from it. This is my opinion. I did NOT call anyone a name. It's the same as me thinking that jumping off a bridge is moronic. There was *no* personal attack. I simply stated that I thought an act was moronic.

*moronic*- having a mental age of between eight and twelve years

 So perhaps you also owe me an apology.


----------



## Tech2

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Akathisia* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_x2_

 

-1

 (Hope somebody is keeping score. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 )


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Kees* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I find it quite enlightening how you present yourself here as a non-audiophile telling me what to do instead of enjoying my audiophile hobby._

 

Are you serious? Do you really not care at all about music? That's amazing if it's true.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Kees* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_These post usually in fact deny there is a topic. How more off topic can you get? I don't think it is unreasonable to ask people who deny the very topic to please move._

 

Brobnigagian! Jonathan Swift would have loved your approach to this.


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Akathisia* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I am going to start posting like crazy in every Grado thread, continuously stating that there is no way anyone could like them since they are so forward in treble bias... would that be fair?_

 

If that's how you feel, why not? That's why we're here.


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_*The Golden Rule.* Respect the intent of the thread-starter._

 

That isn't how internet discussion forums work. All threads are an evolving discussion. The flow of the conversation is the whole point of it. If you start out and end up at the same point, why bother?


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *stevenkelby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_referring to: anyone who spends more money on cables than anything else in the system is a complete and utter idiot.

 Regardless of your other "points", and whether it's right or wrong, this is exactly the kind of rule-breaking that would lead to a 24 hour ban if I were a mod._

 

It's one thing to call some theoretical person an idiot as part of rhetoric, and something else altogether to directly insult a specific person who is participating in the discussion. We should start with a zero tolerance approach to ad hominem attacks and see how that works first.

 If you don't like the idea of commenting disparagingly on theoretical people based on their opinions, this whole thread began as a gripe about theoretical "cable haters". You'd have to be against that too.


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *cosmopragma* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Well, seems it's true then that the powers in charge are planning the kiss of death. You can't await hard censorship and a ban of reason?_

 

I am positive that all it will result in is two forums with the same fights in them. Someone will post something in one forum, and a person who disagrees will respond to it in the other. The first person will dive into the opposing forum to defend themselves. Once they do that, it's fair game for the other side to cross lines too.

 This idea will double the argument.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## HiGHFLYiN9

Steve, you can have multiple quotes in the same post FWIW.


----------



## sejarzo

What has been bugging me about the thread is this:

 MatsudaMan titled it with the question "Why all the cable haters?", and then went on to ask:

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *MatsudaMan* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_... For example, all the people out there that swear that there is no difference between speaker cables and interconnects, aren't you on the wrong forum?_

 

When several non-believers replied, they were shot down and things went (or continued to go) downhill. 

 MatsudaMan, an honest question for you:

 Were you seeking a direct answer from skeptics/non-believers/haters, or simply wanting to hear theories from believers/lovers about why they thought the other side participated in the forum?


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Uncle Erik* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I understand there used to be a problem with threadcrapping in the Music Forum, as well. People who didn't like certain genres and bands would get into debates._

 

I see absolutely no problem with debates... even silly ones. That's why we're here. The problem is with people who feel they have to WIN at all costs. Everyone should be allowed to offer any opinion they want, and the success or failure of their argument should rise and fall with the quality of their supporting arguments.

 Pointing to scientific testing is a valid supporting argument, yet it's forbidden here. Direct ad hominem attacks are not valid supporting arguments, yet they get thrown around right and left. If you want to know the root of the problem, that's it in a nutshell. Everyone should improve their level of discourse and there would be no problem. If the mods want to help, they should be working behind the scenes to get the people throwing out the insults to toe the line.

 Thanks, Hiflyin9. I'm afraid I haven't mastered that skill. When the thread spans multiple pages, I end up getting tangled up in a bunch of separate spawned windows. I took off the signoffs on some to try to pull the space up. Hope that helps.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## nick_charles

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Thanks, Hiflyin9. I'm afraid I haven't mastered that skill. When the thread spans multiple pages, I end up getting tangled up in a bunch of separate spawned windows. I took off the signoffs on some to try to pull the space up. Hope that helps.

 See ya
 Steve_

 

If you hit Multi for each message you want to quote *except* the last one and hit quote for the last one then they all pull together into one answer, it doesnt matter how many pages the thread is, the forum software keeps the context.


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_That isn't how internet discussion forums work. All threads are an evolving discussion. The flow of the conversation is the whole point of it. If you start out and end up at the same point, why bother?_

 

Nothing in my suggestion would prevent an evolving discussion or require a thread to start and end at the same point. 

 The fact that internet discussions are an evolving discussion does not mean that the content of each thread is a complete free-for-all. For example, take the thread that you most recently started regarding Monster Cables versus a coat hangar. Through over 50 posts, that thread has stayed roughly on the topic that you selected when you opened it, because people have respected your intent in opening the thread.

 However, there was a reference in that thread to the movie Mommie Dearest. Suppose that *every* post in that thread from that point on ended up being about the movie Mommie Dearest. So you open another thread, and someone immediately posts again about Joan Crawford, and then every time you open a thread about the Monster Cable study, someone comes in and posts about Mommie Dearest and you never get a chance to discuss the study that was the subject of your thread. I imagine that's how some people feel about threads in the cable forum. 

 I am simply suggesting that we respect the intent of the original poster. If someone wants to have a thread where they discuss their impressions of a particular cable, respect that decision. If someone has heard the cable in question and wants to say, "I've heard it, and there's no difference," then that would be perfectly on topic for that particular thread. But if someone wants to discuss why, in theory, that cable can't sound different than any other cable, have that discussion in a separate thread because that discussion is at best only tangentially related to the topic of the first thread. (Though I strongly believe that separate thread should also be in the cables forum and that there is no reason to create a separate forum.)


----------



## Riboge

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Perhaps that is so, but there is ample evidence that the rules of this forum as they currently exist are ineffective. Some members are frustrated because they cannot discuss how cables sound. Others are frustrated because they cannot discuss how cables can be tested. This has led to elevated levels of frustration on all sides of the issue, and as a result, the moderators are frustrated because all threads end up requiring heavy moderation. In fact, you yourself started a thread today in which you advocated that everyone "stop posting in any of the forums ... if no solution is implemented." In short, no-one is happy with the current state of affairs. Thus, I would submit that there is no downside to my proposal._

 

I agree to the extent that at this point anything different promises to be an improvement, and I repeat that I made this same proposal months ago, but since then I have seen how far the campaign of cable difference debunking is taken and how unresponsive these folks are to many kind, reasoned objections or simply requests to refrain (along with other kinds of rejoinders less admirable). 



  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I honestly have no idea what you mean by this [objection to label of "subjective impressions"]. Could you elaborate?_

 

First, I think we all have trouble with the black and white labels of objective vs. subjective, lover vs. hater, etc. Second, we are audiophiles which means we take listening seriously, do it a lot and, most of us, try to develop skills at listening and discriminating about what we hear, so these clearly dismissive and to some degree inaccurate labels, subjective and/or impressions, grate on one. This is especially so for me as a psychiatrist who has been trained to use myself thru much training to be an 'instrument' capable of detecting and rating states of feeling, latent attitudes, etc, in others under proper circumstances. This is NOT SUBJECTIVE in the sense used here of the antipode to objective. It can be and is proved over and over to be repeatable and reproduceable in experiments involving multiple raters of patient observation. It may have a higher error rate than some testing equipment and more affected by extraneous factors, but that does not make it in itself not valid or productive of useful findings. I believe the same is true for listening skills developed with much practice over time. I too wish this could and would be as well confirmed with experiments. But the lack of that is no disproof of what seems otherwise fairly obvious.



  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_By your logic, a thread that discussed the build quality of cables should also be in a separate forum because it is about build quality and not listening. Discussions regarding the scientific principles that impact the sound of cables are indisputably discussions about cables. Those discussions can be pursued separately from discussions about listening experiences without relegating them to some forum other than the Cable forum as if they had nothing to do with cables at all._

 

What reason would someone have to discuss build quality if it made no difference? Clearly a discussion of the build of a cable is related to some idea of "better" in comparing cables which would make it appropriate for the listeners' thread. Also, the current cadre of malignant cable debunkers would permit no such discussion about "the scientific principles that impact the sound of cables" because they insist that no such impact exists or is possible in that they all sound the same, no?

*What is the difference in principle between an op labeling his thread as about IF cables sound different and his opting to post in the one of two cable subforums that is devoted to that? The practical difference I see is that it will be much easier to tell when a post is out of place and thus easier to police for all of us.*


----------



## Wmcmanus

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *UseName* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I can't disagree with this more... you *don't* want to alienate people but you want *separate* sub-forums for differing opinions?? Seems like it's a much better way to alienate people. Of course, I am new here... so what do I know. 

 As far as this thread serving a purpose, well.... it seems like a pretty hot topic. Maybe you, personally have exhausted by these discussions but it looks like the majority of the people in this thread are not. Otherwise, they would not post here. 

 So... either the bulk of the people participating in this thread are getting something from it, or they are morons for wasting their time. Nobody is being extremely rude, and the thread was started for this reason. 

 Please let us have our fun._

 

Okay, so long as you say you're having fun, keep at it. 

 I don't know, it just isn't jiving with my sense of fun. But then again, I prefer fast cars, cold beer, crazy women, live music, sporting events, a great book... anything but these sorts of discussions concerning how best to regulate the behavior of grown adults who are intentionally antagonistic and like nothing more than to constantly push the envelope; to 'challenge' the opinions, beliefs, and experiences of people who have repeatedly asked them to just be left alone so that they can express their opinions based on actual listening experiences, in peace. 

 These same people are smart enough to never do anything outwardly wrong (per the TOU) that will get them banned or even warned. Yet they know fully well that their constant intrusions are unkind, unwelcome, unnecessary and selfishly motivated. They know that by repeating their same mantra in thread after thread in front of the same crowd of observers, that it won't 'prove' anything to anyone other than to themselves (i.e, they can remind themselves about how much they know and thus how little everyone else knows). But because doing so feels so good, they simply can't resist, and as such, their snide comments and aide swipes are seemingly endless, to the point of driving many people away from the forums. No matter how many people say, "Enough already!" they still persist. You watch, it won't take long. I'll be reading counter proposals to my version of the truth before we get to the next page in this thread.

 But the irony of it all is that no matter how many moderators we might add, and even if there were enough of us to read every single post in every single thread (and, even less likely, if we were inclined to do so), it still wouldn't be possible to stop this train. Not when there is a group of people who are committed to a cause! So if we decide to do nothing about it, we're wrong, and if we decide to address it in one way or another (a subjectivist forum of whatever), we'll still be wrong, just in the eyes of a different group of people.

 The best thing, of course, would be for people to be truly respectful of one another, and of of one another's opinions. Not just respectful on the surface to avoid being moderated and thereby allowing yourself to continue to beat on the same drum over and over again, all day, all night, all weekend, and all year long. A respectful approach would be, "Well, you know, my position on this matter is well known, so I won't comment further" and then be done with it, such that whomever it is that you don't think knows as much as you do or is blinded to the 'truth' can at least have a chance to engage in a discussion about what they want to talk about, rather than to be continually redirected to the one and only thing that you want to talk about.

 I don't think there is any sure fire way to deal with this sort of thing. Either you allow the few to continually annoy the many, or you try to separate the discussions such that each group can have a chance to talk about what they really want to talk about without all sorts of interference from the other side. But issuing short term bans here, there, and everywhere (as wrist slaps or "time outs") is certainly not the solution; that won't change the behavior patterns at all, especially for those who are bent on a cause. It would also create an even wider gap between the "us" (as moderators) and "them" (as members) and none of us want to be Barney Fife. So like it or not, people simply need to use good judgment and to self regulate their posting behavior; that would solve more problems than would any other measure we could possibly take. Don't post just to antagonize and don't post just to retaliate against the antagonist.


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Riboge* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_What reason would someone have to discuss build quality if it made no difference? Clearly a discussion of the build of a cable is related to some idea of "better" in comparing cables which would make it appropriate for the listeners' thread._

 

Not necessarily. Someone might be interested in build quality because all other things being equal (including the sound), a higher quality cable lasts longer. 

  Quote:


 Also, the current cadre of malignant cable debunkers would permit no such discussion about "the scientific principles that impact the sound of cables" because they insist that no such impact exists or is possible in that they all sound the same, no? 
 

No. The so-called "malignant cable debunkers" can state their position; they cannot, however, prohibit the discussion of contrary views. If you feel or anyone else feels that their position is not well-supported, then they can offer a better-reasoned, well-supported rebuttal of that position. That is what a forum is all about.

  Quote:


 *What is the difference in principle between an op labeling his thread as about IF cables sound different and his opting to post in the one of two cable subforums that is devoted to that? The practical difference I see is that it will be much easier to tell when a post is out of place and thus easier to police for all of us.* 
 

The issue that I have is that you want to segregate certain types of discussion to some forum other than the cables forum by making the artificial and arbitrary decision that certain discussions are less relevant to the broader subject of "cables" than others. It relegates the so-called skeptics to second-class citizen status and implies that their beliefs are somehow less valid than others. It would also separate the participants in the discussion on the basis of their beliefs. That is not what a forum should be about. 

 Moreover, the mere fact that there will two forums in which cable discussions can take place will lead to *more* confusion and work for the moderators, not less. For example, it is an indisputable fact that anyone who wanted to start a thread and wanted the input of both the so-called skeptics and so-called believers would need to start two difference threads on the same subject. That is *not* efficient, and not conducive to an open discussion. Moreover, there would be innumerable instances where people started a thread in the wrong forum. If, on the other hand, these discussion were allowed to co-exist in the same forum subject to the rules that I've laid out, there would be many threads where the question of "which type of thread is this" would probably never arise in the first place, but for those who wanted to designate a thread as one type or another, they would have the ability to do so.


----------



## UseName

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Riboge* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I agree to the extent that at this point anything different promises to be an improvement, and I repeat that I made this same proposal months ago, but since then I have seen how far the campaign of cable difference debunking is taken and how unresponsive these folks are to many kind, reasoned objections or simply requests to refrain (along with other kinds of rejoinders less admirable). 




 First, I think we all have trouble with the black and white labels of objective vs. subjective, lover vs. hater, etc. Second, we are audiophiles which means we take listening seriously, do it a lot and, most of us, try to develop skills at listening and discriminating about what we hear, so these clearly dismissive and to some degree inaccurate labels, subjective and/or impressions, grate on one. This is especially so for me as a psychiatrist who has been trained to use myself thru much training to be an 'instrument' capable of detecting and rating states of feeling, latent attitudes, etc, in others under proper circumstances. This is NOT SUBJECTIVE in the sense used here of the antipode to objective. It can be and is proved over and over to be repeatable and reproduceable in experiments involving multiple raters of patient observation. It may have a higher error rate than some testing equipment and more affected by extraneous factors, but that does not make it in itself not valid or productive of useful findings. I believe the same is true for listening skills developed with much practice over time. I too wish this could and would be as well confirmed with experiments. But the lack of that is no disproof of what seems otherwise fairly obvious._

 

_subjective - The part of analysis that relies on the judgement and skill of the analyst._

 I don't see how being a psychiatrist and using yourself as the 'instrument' isn't subjective. I don't mean this as an insult to your profession. The analyst can be very very good. They may also be better/more reliable than objective tests that don't account for all variables. 

 But your profession is highly subjective based on the definition I posted. Same as listening. Both are subjective, but not necessarily bad.


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Either you allow the few to continually annoy the many, or you try to separate the discussions such that each group can have a chance to talk about what they really want to talk about without all sorts of interference from the other side._

 

The problem with this approach is that it forces people to choose "sides." Yet, there are people in this very thread who have said, "I believe in some things, but I am skeptical of others. I want to learn more." Those people want to be able to have a dialog that includes multiple perspectives.


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_However, there was a reference in that thread to the movie Mommie Dearest. Suppose that *every* post in that thread from that point on ended up being about the movie Mommie Dearest._

 

It's different to talk about a subject completely unrelated to home audio. That is clearly a digression. But requiring that all threads that start out as taking one particular point of view about audio stay with that point of view will squash any kind of discussion. That's a good way to encourage "me too" posts, which are much more destructive than tangents in my opinion.

 By the way, we are discussing internet discussion forums in a thread about "cable haters". Shouldn't we just be talking about how bad the cable haters are?

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## Wmcmanus

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The problem with this approach is that it forces people to choose "sides." Yet, there are people in this very thread who have said, "I believe in some things, but I am skeptical of others. I want to learn more." Those people want to be able to have a dialog that includes multiple perspectives._

 

You can have multiple perspectives in any thread in any sub forum, but by having a separate skeptics sub forum that is specifically designed to encourage discussions about scientific matters, testing procedures, and such, there will be a happy home for each 'camp'. Those who want to cross over (as I'm sure many will) are free to do so. 

 It will just make things so much cleaner in terms of enforcing the basic rules of posting etiquette. The "Can/do cables make a difference?" debate will not even be entertained in the main cables forum when someone starts a thread about subjective listening impressions, unless the OP specifically asks for opinions about this. 

 I know that you don't think it will make a difference, but by separating these basic types of discussions and by having some bright lines in terms of what then would be allowable (versus a thread crap) in the main cables forum will go a long way toward bringing peace. There will be just as many debates about everything under the sun as there ever was, but those debates will no longer be superimposed where they don't rightfully belong. 

 Again, none of us wants to be moderating cables threads all day long. It might not be a perfect solution but it should help.


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_to 'challenge' the opinions, beliefs, and experiences of people who have repeatedly asked them to just be left alone so that they can express their opinions based on actual listening experiences, in peace._

 

If someone holds a particular opinion, and doesn't want it to be questioned about it, _why are they posting in an internet discussion forum?_ A forum is by definition an open discussion of various opinions.

 If they want to be at peace, _why do they respond with vitriol_ to people who might hold a differing opinion?

 You've got it completely backwards. The problem is the anger, not disagreement. Disagreement over whether cables make an audible difference in a stereo system is no excuse to not be able to control one's temper. Peace comes from within. If it isn't someone disagreeing with them on cables, it'll be the line at the supermarket or traffic on the freeway that gets them all purple in the face and worked up.

 My advice for those who are angry about all this is to just go listen to some music and forget about it. It's just a conversation about wires on the internet for cryin' out loud.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## Riboge

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Not necessarily. Someone might be interested in build quality because all other things being equal (including the sound), a higher quality cable lasts longer._

 

A minor exception...but such a thread would still be appropriate for the subforum not about if there are sound differences 


  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_No. The so-called "malignant cable debunkers" can state their position; they cannot, however, prohibit the discussion of contrary views. If you feel or anyone else feels that their position is not well-supported, then they can offer a better-reasoned, well-supported rebuttal of that position. That is what a forum is all about._

 

Really? Then why do we feel the need for any change at all? Surely you must get that a lot of folk feel they are not permitted to have discussions of a kind tolerable or useful to them. They mostly fall silent, the ultimate state of prohibition.


  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The issue that I have is that you want to segregate certain types of discussion to some forum other than the cables forum by making the artificial and arbitrary decision that certain discussions are less relevant to the broader subject of "cables" than others. It relegates the so-called skeptics to second-class citizen status and implies that their beliefs are somehow less valid than others. It would also separate the participants in the discussion on the basis of their beliefs. That is not what a forum should be about._

 

We make discriminations of relevance all the time. Not relevant to a discussion of what cable sounds better does not mean "second-class".
  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Moreover, the mere fact that there will two forums in which cable discussions can take place will lead to *more* confusion and work for the moderators, not less. For example, it is an indisputable fact that anyone who wanted to start a thread and wanted the input of both the so-called skeptics and so-called believers would need to start two difference threads on the same subject. That is *not* efficient, and not conducive to an open discussion. Moreover, there would be innumerable instances where people started a thread in the wrong forum. If, on the other hand, these discussion were allowed to co-exist in the same forum subject to the rules that I've laid out, there would be many threads where the question of "which type of thread is this" would probably never arise in the first place, but for those who wanted to designate a thread as one type or another, they would have the ability to do so._

 

This is not necessarily so and much the function of how the subforums are defined. These should be mutually exclusive. How about:
Cable subforum A: threads premised on the idea that cables can and often do sound different from one another

Cable subforum B: threads premised on the idea that basically well-made cables will always sound the same or that any claim of difference requires scientifically valid demonstration/proof

 I think it's pretty insulting to our fellow members to hold that they wouldn't be able to distinguish these and post in the appropriate one. Furthermore, the separation is between types of threads not people. I will surely check out BOTH forums and so will many others, so one need not post the same in both to pose an issue to all people.

 One more thing: There is no Cables forum now. They are covered in an everything else catchall forum now as you well know. So, there could be two subforums to this or 2 new separate Cable forums formed. I don't know what Jude and moderators have in mind, do you? I myself would favor a third arrangement, namely, a new forum on scientific approaches to and testing of audio recordings and equipment which would include all intended for a 'skeptics' forum.


----------



## UseName

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You can have multiple perspectives in any thread in any sub forum, but by having a separate skeptics sub forum that is specifically designed to encourage discussions about scientific matters, testing procedures, and such, there will be a happy home for each 'camp'. Those who want to cross over (as I'm sure many will) are free to do so. 

 It will just make things so much cleaner in terms of enforcing the basic rules of posting etiquette. The "Can/do cables make a difference?" debate will not even be entertained in the main cables forum when someone starts a thread about subjective listening impressions, unless the OP specifically asks for opinions about this. 

 I know that you don't think it will make a difference, but by separating these basic types of discussions and by having some bright lines in terms of what then would be allowable (versus a thread crap) in the main cables forum will go a long way toward bringing peace. There will be just as many debates about everything under the sun as there ever was, but those debates will no longer be superimposed where they don't rightfully belong. 

 Again, none of us wants to be moderating cables threads all day long. It might not be a perfect solution but it should help._

 

I know i am a newcomer, but I have been in religious forums that aren't this bad...

 "The "Can/do cables make a difference?" debate will not even be entertained in the main cables forum when someone starts a thread about subjective listening impressions"

 What if an OP posts that cable A has better bass than cable B and I have heard Cable A and Cable B, and don't hear a difference? Can I post? or is that banned?

 What if I OP only talks about 1 cable? and I don't hear a difference? Can I post? 

 What if I think cables make a difference when it comes to analog signals but not to digital signals? Can I post?

 What if I think analog and digital cables make a difference, but I hear no difference between differing power cables, can I post?

 Will you be expanding these rules to headphones? amps? DACs? for example, there are those that believe that as long as amp A and B both have a flat freq response, and gives the same output power, they are indistinguishable in DBTs. 

 These are the kind of problems you will be creating.


----------



## nick_charles

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Riboge* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_These should be mutually exclusive. How about:
Cable subforum A: threads premised on the idea that cables can and often do sound different from one another

Cable subforum B: threads premised on the idea that basically well-made cables will always sound the same or that any claim of difference requires scientifically valid demonstration/proof

 ...
 I myself would favor a third arrangement, namely, a new forum on scientific approaches to and testing of audio recordings and equipment which would include all intended for a 'skeptics' forum._

 

What happens if someone in Forum A posts "I just upgraded to cable Y and it is so much better than cable X" then someone else posts "I have to disagree, I tried X and Y and they sounded the same to me" then someone else chimes in with "I have tried loads of cables including X and Y and they all sounded the same to me" . It would seem legit then that someone could post "wow it seems like there is evidence that cables do not sound different after all" . Unless you actually prevent posts from folks who have tried different cables and *not *found a difference I dont see how you can prevent the status quo.


----------



## stevenkelby

Quote:


 Originally Posted by stevenkelby View Post
 referring to: anyone who spends more money on cables than anything else in the system is a complete and utter idiot. 
 

 Quote:


 Regardless of your other "points", and whether it's right or wrong, this is exactly the kind of rule-breaking that would lead to a 24 hour ban if I were a mod. 
 



  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_It's one thing to call some theoretical person an idiot as part of rhetoric, and something else altogether to directly insult a specific person who is participating in the discussion. We should start with a zero tolerance approach to ad hominem attacks and see how that works first.

 If you don't like the idea of commenting disparagingly on theoretical people based on their opinions, this whole thread began as a gripe about theoretical "cable haters". You'd have to be against that too._

 

I am against that too.

 Any post that can reasonably be regarded as "inflammatory" is against the rules and action should be taken, IMO.

 Of course it goes both ways.


----------



## 3x331m

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *nick_charles* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_What happens if someone in Forum A posts "I just upgraded to cable Y and it is so much better than cable X" then someone else posts "I have to disagree, I tried X and Y and they sounded the same to me" then someone else chimes in with "I have tried loads of cables including X and Y and they all sounded the same to me" . It would seem legit then that someone could post "wow it seems like there is evidence that cables do not sound different after all" . Unless you actually prevent posts from folks who have tried different cables and *not *found a difference I dont see how you can prevent the status quo._

 

Why do we need to split the forums ?

 Music listening is an art. Everyone hears differently. We can't make others to hear the same thing we do.

 It's your money and it's up to you to take my information or go waste your money. If you don't believe me, you can go test it yourself. I think that the main purpose of forums is to hear different opinions. If you don't believe someone's information, you can simply say that you don't believe it and walk away. As long as we don't call name or post rudely, I think we all can get along. There will be exceptions, but I bet you that the mods would take care of them in no time.

 If we all can try to be respectful to each others, then we might all have a bunch of happy campers. However, that's easy to be said than done. There will be ones who will just pick a fight for no reason, or act impolitely just because they think they can hide behind their monitor.

 Come on folks !!!!

 We are the members, and we are the forums. It's up to us to create the culture of our forums. We can choose to make it the worst place on earth or we can make it an enjoyable place to share our information.

 I think someone might disagree with my comments, but that's ok. We're all different, and I won't have any objection to other's disagreements, because I just want to contribute to the good cause. I have nothing to loose.


----------



## Riboge

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *nick_charles* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_What happens if someone in Forum A posts "I just upgraded to cable Y and it is so much better than cable X" then someone else posts "I have to disagree, I tried X and Y and they sounded the same to me" then someone else chimes in with "I have tried loads of cables including X and Y and they all sounded the same to me" . It would seem legit then that someone could post "wow it seems like there is evidence that cables do not sound different after all" . Unless you actually prevent posts from folks who have tried different cables and *not *found a difference I dont see how you can prevent the status quo._

 

The premise posed for B was that cables will *always* sound the same, i.e.,cannot sound different or you have to prove it to say it. This is far different from reporting that you have listened and do not hear a difference. This belongs in A. You're trying to make something simple seem complicated. One is reporting what is heard or not heard=A, the other is asserting scientific principles or extrapolating from scientific studies=B. So all your examples suit A fine. It's stuff like "you can't have heard a difference...", "it must be 'placebo", "If you paid so much for a cable you're foolish", etc, that has no place in A.


----------



## Huckster

Whats wrong with a little hate? I personally think the value of cables is more in their reliability and craftsmanship, rather than how good they "make you feel/enhance your sound" that audiofreaks love to confuse. If a cable is seemingly going to last you 50 years with constant use, its perfectly viable to spend 50+ bucks on it. 

 The upraditis is fluent in many posters Because no one is there to calm worshippers of a certain product down, or provide a differing opinion. Differing opinion can be translated into hate, and if you really think someone hates you/a cable for talking about cables, maybe you should go outside and get some energy out the regular way.


----------



## meat01

I think the forum is fine the way it is now.

 If someone posts a review or their thoughts on a particular cable or a few cables, then people should not crap in their thread or post off topic stuff. If there is a thread crap, alert one of the moderators. 

 If someone posts a question about the sound differences, material differences or why all the cable haters, then expect a debate and don't post in that thread if you don't want to debate.

 There should be no name calling or personal attacks in any of the threads.


----------



## UseName

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Riboge* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The premise posed for B was that cables will *always* sound the same, i.e.,cannot sound different or you have to prove it to say it. This is far different from reporting that you have listened and do not hear a difference. This belongs in A. You're trying to make something simple seem complicated. One is reporting what is heard or not heard=A, the other is asserting scientific principles or extrapolating from scientific studies=B. So all your examples suit A fine. It's stuff like "you can't have heard a difference...", "it must be 'placebo", "If you paid so much for a cable you're foolish", etc, that has no place in A._

 

I accept this opinion, but what is wrong with saying something may be a placebo? 

 Suppose I posted a review about the difference between shure's e500 and SE530's. I'm pretty sure there would be numerous people chiming in that they are the same model just a different number and there shouldn't be any difference. I highly doubt anyone would say that a person saying they shouldn't be able to hear a difference is out of line. 

 But I heard a difference, and that is why i posted a comparison. You are entitled to your opinion and I am entitled to mine. 

 Why do we need special rules for cables? 

 If someone said I was an idiot, or foolish, then it is different.


----------



## Riboge

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *UseName* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I accept this opinion, but what is wrong with saying something may be a placebo? 

 Suppose I posted a review about the difference between shure's e500 and SE530's. I'm pretty sure there would be numerous people chiming in that they are the same model just a different number and there shouldn't be any difference. I highly doubt anyone would say that a person saying they shouldn't be able to hear a difference is out of line. 

 But I heard a difference, and that is why i posted a comparison. You are entitled to your opinion and I am entitled to mine. 

 Why do we need special rules for cables? 

 If someone said I was an idiot, or foolish, then it is different._

 

If you had not had your entire Head-fi career on this thread alone(seemingly) you would know that this would not be a problem. That is not what has been happening. The malignant debunkers don't report that they have listened and don't hear a difference. They say, in effect, that they don't have to try out the given cable/listen or whatever because 'scientific' principle is their guide and it says there can't be one. That is as much as to say anyone reporting a perceived difference is misguided, wrong and, if they persist, a fool. Please take as a principle that you should spent more time reading and researching about what you are talking about than you spend expressing yourself.


----------



## UseName

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Riboge* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_If you had not had your entire Head-fi career on this thread alone(seemingly) you would know that this would not be a problem. That is not what has been happening. _

 

I'm not sure if this is intended as a personal attack or not... but when I first read it I was offended. I apologize if i misinterpreted this but please do not mention my post count, or lack of prior experience posting on this particular forum. I feel it is irrelevant to the conversation, and borderline offensive. 

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Riboge* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The malignant debunkers don't report that they have listened and don't hear a difference. They say, in effect, that they don't have to try out the given cable/listen or whatever because 'scientific' principle is their guide and it says there can't be one._

 


 I see nothing wrong with asking for evidence. A lot of people don't have the luxury of testing every cable themselves. I commend those that ask for evidence. I think it is an intelligent thing for any consumer, and I think it should be encouraged in any market place. 

 Please take a look at my e500 and SE530 example again. If I post a review on the difference between the two, and say the e500 has much deeper bass, my thread would be full of people telling me that they are the same model. They aren't being rude, and they don't have to have any experience with these headphones. If I persisted and said that "there is a difference, I don't care what any engineer at Shure said, I can hear a difference", someone might come along and ask to DBT, or that one of them is defective, or it is a placebo. I think there is absolutely nothing wrong with this. It is very questionable to a good number of people whether the e500s or the SE530 sound different. 

 I think the differing opinions in this thread show the effect that cables has is also questionable to a good number of people. 

  Quote:


 That is as much as to say anyone reporting a perceived difference is misguided, wrong and, if they persist, a fool. 
 

Calling a person a fool and saying I don't think cables make a difference are two entirely different things. The former is very rude, the latter is not. 

  Quote:


 Please take as a principle that you should spent more time reading and researching about what you are talking about than you spend expressing yourself. 
 

I fail to see the relevance in this, and I find it very offensive. You have no idea my level of experience. Just because my post count is low, doesn't mean I can't offer an insightful opinion.


----------



## Wmcmanus

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_If someone holds a particular opinion, and doesn't want it to be questioned about it, why are they posting in an internet discussion forum? A forum is by definition an open discussion of various opinions.

 If they want to be at peace, why do they respond with vitriol to people who might hold a differing opinion?

 You've got it completely backwards. The problem is the anger, not disagreement. Disagreement over whether cables make an audible difference in a stereo system is no excuse to not be able to control one's temper. Peace comes from within. If it isn't someone disagreeing with them on cables, it'll be the line at the supermarket or traffic on the freeway that gets them all purple in the face and worked up._

 

If every time you're in the grocery store you tell every person in line that they're stupid for buying any products that contain sugar because you believe that sugar is bad for them, and you insist on disagreeing with them because you're only trying to help them to see the light, and you do this over and over and over again, everywhere you go and every time you see people about to eat something with sugar...

  Quote:


 My advice for those who are angry about all this is to just go listen to some music and forget about it. It's just a conversation about wires on the internet for cryin' out loud. 
 

It's just a conversation about wires on the internet that the same people keep invading over and over and over again, in I'd bet at least 100 threads with the same viewpoint, and always with the intent of steering the conversation away from listening impressions to the tedious "if" cables make a difference question. 

 Maybe you should take your own advice and listen to some music instead of invading every single thread that in any way shape or form discusses cables with the same diatribe. It starts to wear thin after the 99th time or so.


----------



## Wmcmanus

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *UseName* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I know i am a newcomer, but I have been in religious forums that aren't this bad...

 "The "Can/do cables make a difference?" debate will not even be entertained in the main cables forum when someone starts a thread about subjective listening impressions"

 What if an OP posts that cable A has better bass than cable B and I have heard Cable A and Cable B, and don't hear a difference? Can I post? or is that banned?_

 

Yes, based on your listening impressions, you can't hear it. No problem in stating so. But then going into this saving the world thing about how people are wasting their money, deceiving themselves, buying snake oil, there's no scientific proof, yada yada, no, you won't be allowed to do that. There will be another forum for those types of discussions. 

 So unless the OP specifically asks for these types of theoretical debates, they're not welcome in his thread that is designed to discuss what people think of the Zu Mobius versus Moon Audio Silver Dragon versus other Senn replacement cables. He knows that some people don't think that cables can even theoretically make a difference, but he doesn't need to keep hearing that same tired argument in each and every thread about cables (nor do the rest of us).

  Quote:


 What if I OP only talks about 1 cable? and I don't hear a difference? Can I post? 
 

Yes, but if you can't hear a difference between one cable and a pair of headphones with no cables, I'd be concerned. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 Just kidding.

  Quote:


 What if I think cables make a difference when it comes to analog signals but not to digital signals? Can I post? 
 

Probably the kind of thread that would belong in the skeptics forum, but sure you can post. All the separate forum will do is redirect some traffic such that there is a designated place for these kinds of debates.

  Quote:


 What if I think analog and digital cables make a difference, but I hear no difference between differing power cables, can I post? 
 

Again, if the thread is about subjective listening impressions and you've done your own listening with the cables being discussed, of course you can post. It's when people post theoretical arguments about "whether" cables "can" make a difference, and they haven't bothered to do their own listening that the discussions break down. 

 How would you like it if you were comparing Headphones A, B and C, and someone came along and said the all headphones sound the same? Of course you know that they don't because you've heard differences with your own two ears, but they insist in each and every thread about headphones that they all sound the same and you're a fool to think differently.

  Quote:


 Will you be expanding these rules to headphones? amps? DACs? for example, there are those that believe that as long as amp A and B both have a flat freq response, and gives the same output power, they are indistinguishable in DBTs. 

 These are the kind of problems you will be creating. 
 

There doesn't seem to be any real problems in the other forums, so no. 

 You can try to break it down any way you want to, and if your desire is to prove that whatever we do (or don't do) to address the issue at hand won't work, then you can probably make a case for that point of view. But then so could someone else, just by taking the opposite point of view. In other words, we're damned if we do and damned if we don't. Why? Because the real issue is with people, not cables.

 Certain people intentionally invade threads to antagonize everyone else over and over again. This is what we're wanting to get rid of. It's kind of hard to explain in simple terms to someone who hasn't been around here for very long. But it has become quite sickening in my opinion, and the problem is behavioral. It has nothing to do, really, with any other issue. It's people who pride themselves on derailing threads. That's what we'll be trying to prevent going forward. How it all plays out is yet to be determined in full.


----------



## Vul Kuolun

BTW, the accusation "every single thread get's crapped by the same individuals, so we can not have a conversation on subjective themes" is simply wrong. Here are some of the threads from page 1 and 2, each and every one containing more than enough debatable stuff to start a debate on principles if the accusations against "the cable haters" were correct.

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/ca...31/index2.html

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/st...-works-300753/

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/mo...arquad-298451/

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/ur...rading-303351/

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/bu...ver-ic-300293/

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/be...uejean-294801/

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/mo...s-701s-302235/

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/wh...ius-uk-302845/

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/re...cables-301979/

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/hd...27/index2.html

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/ch...55/index2.html

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/he...ension-301875/


----------



## wower

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Yes, based on your listening impressions, you can't hear it. No problem in stating so. But then going into this saving the world thing about how people are wasting their money, deceiving themselves, buying snake oil, there's no scientific proof, yada yada, no, you won't be allowed to do that. There will be another forum for those types of discussions. 

 So unless the OP specifically asks for these types of theoretical debates, they're not welcome in his thread that is designed to discuss what people think of the Zu Mobius versus Moon Audio Silver Dragon versus other Senn replacement cables. He knows that some people don't think that cables can even theoretically make a difference, but he doesn't need to keep hearing that same tired argument in each and every thread about cables (nor do the rest of us)._

 

Sweet! So the skeptics forum is a go?!? I normally don't go in the cable forum except I saw Wayne posted and wanted to read his comments. Lately the forum has been useless because a group of people are on a crusade to save me money. But I don't want to be saved! This is great news. The music forum has a no thread c--ping policy and head-fi didn't implode and I don't think this decision sink head-fi either. Two thumbs up!


----------



## UseName

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_
 How would you like it if you were comparing Headphones A, B and C, and someone came along and said the all headphones sound the same? Of course you know that they don't because you've heard differences with your own two ears, but they insist in each and every thread about headphones that they all sound the same and you're a fool to think differently._

 

Why would I care if they came in and said there was no difference? It's understood that if I post an opinion, someone else may not share it. Just because I started the thread, does it mean MY opinion is the only one that is valid? 

 I certainly don't care if I say Headphone A has deaper bass and less rolloff than headphone B, and you come along and say you found headphone B to have deaper bass. 

 Or, even if you came along *without* hearing either headphone and said, "that's strange looking at the frequency response diagrams, Headphone B has much deaper bass, there is no way headphone A should be giving those results". 

 I certainly wouldn't be offended. However, If you called me an idiot for hearing it that way, I would be. 

 I would also take offense if I were the one posting the frequency diagrams and someone told me to take it somewhere else... as tho my opinion is not valued, or wanted... 

  Quote:


 Why? Because the real issue is with people, not cables.

 Certain people intentionally invade threads to antagonize everyone else over and over again. This is what we're wanting to get rid of. It's kind of hard to explain in simple terms to someone who hasn't been around here for very long. But it has become quite sickening in my opinion, and the problem is behavioral. It has nothing to do, really, with any other issue. It's people who pride themselves on derailing threads. That's what we'll be trying to prevent going forward. How it all plays out is yet to be determined in full. 
 

I know I am new here, but I've participated on a variety of other forums, and I have never seen anything like this. I was shocked when I saw the sticky about DBTs...I even PMed a mod about it. And that is what got me interested in this particular thread. It's such a strange way to handle things... IMO.


----------



## Akathisia

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *UseName* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I know I am new here, but I've participated on a variety of other forums, and I have never seen anything like this. I was shocked when I saw the sticky about DBTs...I even PMed a mod about it. And that is what got me interested in this particular thread. It's such a strange way to handle things... IMO._

 

Go back and read some recent cable/tweak threads. You'll see why things are like this. People thread crap. They don't give an opinion and drop it, they call out people for discussing fringe gear like they are bearing the burden of science.


----------



## tomjtx

Usename, I agree with you.


----------



## stevenkelby

Ah I see. Maybe the new cable forum will be a place to move inappropriate posts too. Because of course these same 6 people (by my personal count) will continue to post the same comments we all have a problem with, in any thread they see fit. 

 Is the new forum intended as a dumping ground for all these annoying posts?

 That would save accusations of censorship, and save having to administer the current rules we have in a time consuming way, dealing with bans etc.

 The new way, someone reports a post using the "!!" a mod sees it and moves it to teh new forum. 

 Is that the idea?

 If so, I think it would work ok.


----------



## DSlayerZX

seriously though, almost all the recent threads regarding to cable upgrade, cable difference have been crapped. by the same people over and over and over again.

 it really wasn't that bad when I first join, what is happening right now? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 how ever, i really wish that the cable forum will be back to the way it was before.


----------



## MaZa

A one question. Now, all of you know that Im sort of skeptic. Though im skeptic for both sides. I believe that cables ARE important. But I have hard time believing they could alter the signal, or if they do then its even worse from my POV.

 So, lets look what electrical device looks like. Probaply everyone of us has opened an amplifier once, or some other electrical device. The electrical signal travels from resistor/transistor/cap/whatever by conductive metal lines. They are also "cables". And usually there are RCA jacks or some other jacks attached by small and thin, cheap wires so the device can be attached to other devices. Now, what cables should do from there is to conduct that signal from that device to another, and do it without resistance etc..., do so flexibly and sometimes bit longer distance and insulate the it from outside interference. But their job is very much the same as is the metal lines inside electric device.(where the cable-jacks are attached) IDEALLY there shouldnt be cable at all, to minimize possible interference etc... whatever cables, jacks and so on might posses etc...

 So, the CD player should be connected to directly to amplifier from RCA to RCA. How would ones audiophile system sound then? Or even better, those devices would be built to same one big integrated device so there wouldnt be need for RCA jacks too that also might add something to the sound, theoretically atleast. Signal is 100% pure from source to amplifier.

 So back to the question. If cable, that connects two devices (which do the actual signal handling) together, does some sound alterations on its own, then isnt the cable actually doing something it SHOULDN'T BE DOING IN A FIRST PLACE?


----------



## stevenkelby

Good point, I wonder about that too. SOme people don't have and connections in their system. The output caps (if there) are soldered to the speaker terminals. No RCA, no cable in the traditional sense etc. 

 I suppose even the wire on the legs of a capacitor, or the pins of a tube, are cables. Apparently over such short distances they don't make as much difference as on longer runs which I could see being true, especially for things like resistance EMI and other areas where there are definitely "differences between cables".

 I think you're last sentence means that any cable is a bad thing anyway, and I could possibly agree with that. Which means that using any cable is possibly going to sound different than using no cable, so there are differences between cables and no cables, and some cables may sound different to others. Maybe.


----------



## MaZa

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *stevenkelby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Good point, I wonder about that too. SOme people don't have and connections in their system. The output caps (if there) are soldered to the speaker terminals. No RCA, no cable in the traditional sense etc. 

 I suppose even the wire on the legs of a capacitor, or the pins of a tube, are cables. Apparently over such short distances they don't make as much difference as on longer runs which I could see being true, especially for things like resistance EMI and other areas where there are definitely "differences between cables".

 I think you're last sentence means that any cable is a bad thing anyway, and I could possibly agree with that. Which means that using any cable is possibly going to sound different than using no cable, so there are differences between cables and no cables, and some cables may sound different to others. Maybe._

 


 Precisely!


----------



## ethebull

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *MaZa* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_If cable, that connects two devices (which do the actual signal handling) together, does some sound alterations on its own, then isnt the cable actually doing something it SHOULDN'T BE DOING IN A FIRST PLACE?_

 

Yes, this is true.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *stevenkelby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_ Which means that using any cable is possibly going to sound different than using no cable, so there are differences between cables and no cables, and some cables may sound different to others. Maybe._

 

Whew!

 Now that we have that figured out, it's time to move along.


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Riboge* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_This is not necessarily so and much the function of how the subforums are defined. These should be mutually exclusive. How about:
Cable subforum A: threads premised on the idea that cables can and often do sound different from one another

Cable subforum B: threads premised on the idea that basically well-made cables will always sound the same or that any claim of difference requires scientifically valid demonstration/proof_

 

If the proposal were to create two cable subforums are you have described, I would have less of an issue with it, even though I firmly believe that it is not necessary. But that is not what has been proposed. What has been proposed is that there would be a separate forum called the "skeptics forum" (it has also been referred as the "kiddie pool," which speaks volumes about the intent of those who are advocating it) which would segregate certain types of discussion completely out of the cable forum as it if had nothing to do with cables at all. 

  Quote:


 I think it's pretty insulting to our fellow members to hold that they wouldn't be able to distinguish these and post in the appropriate one. 
 

Oh, come on. This is not "insulting." It's the truth. Search for the phrase "wrong forum" and see how many times people start threads in incorrect forums, and then factor into the equation that you're not even seeing all of the threads that are quietly moved by the moderators before someone even has a chance to post that. People make this mistake all of the time. It is simple fact.


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Maybe you should take your own advice and listen to some music instead of invading every single thread that in any way shape or form discusses cables with the same diatribe. It starts to wear thin after the 99th time or so._

 

This is the type of lack of civility and respect for other's opinions that I'm talking about. He has an opinion and he's explained about a gazillion times that it's based on his own experience and set of values. If he posts that opinion in a thread where those opinions are off-topic, deal with it on that basis, but otherwise, he is just as entitled as anyone else in this forum to express his opinion.


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Yes, based on your listening impressions, you can't hear it. No problem in stating so. But then going into this saving the world thing about how people are wasting their money, deceiving themselves, buying snake oil, there's no scientific proof, yada yada, no, you won't be allowed to do that. There will be another forum for those types of discussions._

 

Well based on that logic, what is good for the goose if good for the gander, in that case and being objective here, the poor skeptics, do not need neither to hear in everysingle thread about cables, how cables make a difference, and what those differences are, and how they recomend this cable time after time, or the other, while they od not hear any, and even more while those recomendations are all based is extrictly personal experiences with no objective base at all to support the claims...Yeah they know, you hear them... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




.

 Why not better accepting the existance of the two sides, instead of trying to exclude one of them from the discussions, that will be a good monologue then...it is like the horse race with just one horse, wanna bet, of course I will always win!!!


----------



## Kees

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Well based on that logic, what is good for the goose if good for the gander, in that case and being objective here, the poor skeptics, do not need neither to hear in everysingle thread about cables, how cables make a difference, and what those differences are, and how they recomend this cable time after time, or the other, while they od not hear any, and even more while those recomendations are all based is extrictly personal experiences with no objective base at all to support the claims...Yeah they know, you hear them... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





._

 

When they have their owm forum they don't have to.

  Quote:


 Why not better accepting the existance of the two sides, instead of trying to exclude one of them from the discussions, 
 

I think that's exactly what is proposed.

  Quote:


 that will be a good monologue then...it is like the horse race with just one horse, wanna bet, of course I will always win!!! 
 

I don't think we're here to win a race or something, but to share experiences and to discuss them. No winning or losing in order.


----------



## 1117

(singing)

 why can't we be friends?
 why can't we be friends...

 On a serious note, I don't know about the rest of you, but I think this thread has been very productive. I personally like the fact that the issue, while heatedly debated in this thread, has not degenerated to obscene levels. For the most part, everyone has acted civilized. 

 And if you don't agree you are a complete and utter idiot.

 Just kidding, guys... just kidding!

 Anyway, I do have one question though. I might do some DBT of my own in the future, and was wondering the following: is it safe to just unplug and replug different interconnects with the power of the components still on? I ask this because I have a tube amp, and I don't like the idea of having to turn off the amp back and forth.

 How would you guys go about exercising a DBT with a tube amp?

 Also, since SS amps are considered cold and analytical, would it be best to test cables with a SS rig?

 Mind you, this post is not about the results of DBT, but as to how to properly conduct a DBT (reduce as many variables as possible).

 Thanks for the help.


----------



## meat01

A lot of people have posted here that the cable forum has become terrible and every time someone posts a review or recommendation, there is a thread crap. I am not seeing it. Like Vul Kuolun, I have looked at the recent threads about cable recommendations, and I am not seeing thread crapping.

 I realize a few posts may have been deleted, but it looks pretty clean to me.


----------



## Akathisia

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *meat01* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_A lot of people have posted here that the cable forum has become terrible and every time someone posts a review or recommendation, there is a thread crap. I am not seeing it. Like Vul Kuolun, I have looked at the recent threads about cable recommendations, and I am not seeing thread crapping.

 I realize a few posts may have been deleted, but it looks pretty clean to me._

 

It's not just cables, almost anything that goes under the heading of this sub-forum - Cables, Power, Tweaks, Accessories - get's crapped all over.

Audio Desk System- resurrected this year, and then crapped in

Cardas / Ayre Burn-In CD

Cardas Myrtle Wood Blocks - This thread starts getting crapped in hard around pg. 6

Nordost Thor

 And I found these threads in under a minute.

_Edit :_ I also find it miraculous that the same people pop up in each thread saying this stuff doesn't work, the must be loaded because it would cost a lot to try all this equipment...


----------



## Riboge

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_If the proposal were to create two cable subforums are you have described, I would have less of an issue with it, even though I firmly believe that it is not necessary. But that is not what has been proposed. What has been proposed is that there would be a separate forum called the "skeptics forum" (it has also been referred as the "kiddie pool," which speaks volumes about the intent of those who are advocating it) which would segregate certain types of discussion completely out of the cable forum as it if had nothing to do with cables at all._

 

Oh, come on. What has been proposed in a more serious way by Wmcmanus and by me is a forum for the scientific approach to audio equipment and to testing of its performance. It wouldn't be exclusively about cables. The present motivation is clearly to deal with a problem in cable discussions, but as is often the case this can lead to a solution that could have many other benefits in promoting that sort of discussion and getting it to be more a topic of its own than a form of rebuttal of others or way to fight and win per se.


  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Oh, come on. This is not "insulting." It's the truth. Search for the phrase "wrong forum" and see how many times people start threads in incorrect forums, and then factor into the equation that you're not even seeing all of the threads that are quietly moved by the moderators before someone even has a chance to post that. People make this mistake all of the time. It is simple fact._

 

It's also a simple fact that no one proposes merging all the forums because people can't figure out where to put posts and make mistakes in placing them and moderators want to save time by not having to correct them. The solution in both cases is to ask people to reread the criteria for each forum and take more care to consider them in deciding where to post.


----------



## cosmopragma

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Sorry our American mindest doesn't meet your standards. 

 What exactly is being proposed that you would regard as censorship and the outlaw of reason? Oh, I've got it. You must think that the idea of moving the "great debate" threads about whether cables "can" make a difference into a separate forum would be a bad thing. You would prefer that we engage in the same dialogue in each and every thread that is ever started about cables. Ohhhh kayyyyy...



Owl Rly - StoneHome


 Gee, we'll miss you. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I'm sure you've broken the hearts of many lovely women.

 So you're leaving Head-Fi because we're planning to separate the cables forum into two sub forums such that everyone can say whatever it is they want to say, but in appropriate threads that are designed to encourage such discussions, rather than in any old thread they want to crap in._

 

Today I've searched and read threads for a few hours.
 I don't frequent the cable forum regularly and I was not aware how bad the current state of this subforum often is.I still think that you and your moderator peers are one sided but I agree the problems have to be adressed.

 Also my assumption that if not now than sooner or later any scepticism might be encaged into a trash bin aka sceptics forum is apparently wrong.

  Quote:


 Will you be expanding these rules to headphones? amps? DACs? for example, there are those that believe that as long as amp A and B both have a flat freq response, and gives the same output power, they are indistinguishable in DBTs. These are the kind of problems you will be creating. 
 

you've answered  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* 
_There doesn't seem to be any real problems in the other forums, so no. _

 

I think your sarcasm about my drama is well justified and *I have to apologize.*



  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* 
_Again, I ask the question: is this thread still serving a productive purpose?_

 

I think so.
 Thanks for taking the time to clarify the what and why in this thread.
 Although I'm more on the sceptic side of the fence I for one am now for the change.
 Patrick82, markl et al should have a place where they can discuss their believes in peace without being interrupted by uncalled demands for objective evidence.No one is forced to join them.
 Some will perceive it as a gated community, some might see a ghetto.


----------



## MaZa

Quote:


 Cardas / Ayre Burn-In CD 
 

All I can say about that Cardas disc... What? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 A CD with couple of sinewaves and noise-sounds demagnetises? A normal Audio CD, on-off patterns, 0's and 1's that a laser reads, which is turned to analog sound? Its a fricking 100% data that is on the CD, just like computer files, but in CD-A format that is a standard in music CDs. It cannot demagnetise ANYTHING. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Digital signal doesnt have any power on its own, its JUST DATA.

 One doesnt need to be a skeptic... There is no thread crapping there, just a shoot-down of utter hoax which a person with even slightest understanding of Digital, Compact Discs and Computers sees to be BS and that isnt even a matter of belief or need to proving anything, it goes against the whole princible what compact disc is, a plastic covered aluminum or gold disc with microscopic pits which are read to be 0 or 1 depending how the laser reflects from them. The pattern is converted to line-level analog signal which is where the need for amplifiers and such are starting to appear. 


 No comments on the other threads. But shooting down a hoax is totally different subject than thread crapping. It doesnt have any room for "perhaps" or "possibly" like there might be with cables. Claiming that such disc might work is like claiming that world might be flat.


----------



## Akathisia

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *MaZa* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_All I can say about that Cardas disc... What? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 A CD with couple of sinewaves and noise-sounds demagnetises? A normal Audio CD, on-off patterns, 0's and 1's that a laser reads, which is turned to analog sound? Its a fricking 100% data that is on the CD, just like computer files, but in CD-A format that is a standard in music CDs. It cannot demagnetise ANYTHING. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Digital signal doesnt have any power on its own, its JUST DATA.

 One doesnt need to be a skeptic... There is no thread crapping there, just a shoot-down of utter hoax which a person with even slightest understanding of Digital, Compact Discs and Computers sees to be BS and that isnt even a matter of belief or need to proving anything, it goes against the whole princible what compact disc is, a plastic covered aluminum or gold disc with microscopic pits which are read to be 0 or 1 depending how the laser reflects from them. The pattern is converted to line-level analog signal which is where the need for amplifiers and such are starting to appear. 


 No comments on the other threads. But shooting down a hoax is totally different subject than thread crapping. It doesnt have any room for "perhaps" or "possibly" like there might be with cables. Claiming that such disc might work is like claiming that world might be flat._

 

I wasn't commenting on whether or not the Cardas CD works (I've never tried it...), but when you look at the participants in the thread, it's the same people that have a post count based on thread crapping.

 People are worried about new members coming here and being swayed into buying $XXXX cables and tweaks, be I'm more worried about the Head-Fi vets that have actually contributed to this site over the years leaving because of a few members with nothing better to do then try and prove how inteligent they are on a headphones forum on the internet.

_edit :_ MaZa, I actually think you are a beneficial member to this site, wouldn't you be irritated if the same handful of people raped every thread you started?


----------



## UseName

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Akathisia* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_It's not just cables, almost anything that goes under the heading of this sub-forum - Cables, Power, Tweaks, Accessories - get's crapped all over.

Audio Desk System- resurrected this year, and then crapped in

Cardas / Ayre Burn-In CD

Cardas Myrtle Wood Blocks - This thread starts getting crapped in hard around pg. 6

Nordost Thor

 And I found these threads in under a minute.

Edit : I also find it miraculous that the same people pop up in each thread saying this stuff doesn't work, the must be loaded because it would cost a lot to try all this equipment... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

Saying stuff doesn't work isn't thread crapping. It's just being skeptical.


----------



## meat01

I am sorry, I should have explained the word recent. By recent, lets say this year (3 months). With the exception of the Cardas CD thread, all of the threads you listed were 4 or 5 months old.


----------



## UseName

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *MaZa* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_All I can say about that Cardas disc... What? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 A CD with couple of sinewaves and noise-sounds demagnetises? A normal Audio CD, on-off patterns, 0's and 1's that a laser reads, which is turned to analog sound? Its a fricking 100% data that is on the CD, just like computer files, but in CD-A format that is a standard in music CDs. It cannot demagnetise ANYTHING. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Digital signal doesnt have any power on its own, its JUST DATA.

 One doesnt need to be a skeptic... There is no thread crapping there, just a shoot-down of utter hoax which a person with even slightest understanding of Digital, Compact Discs and Computers sees to be BS and that isnt even a matter of belief or need to proving anything, it goes against the whole princible what compact disc is, a plastic covered aluminum or gold disc with microscopic pits which are read to be 0 or 1 depending how the laser reflects from them. The pattern is converted to line-level analog signal which is where the need for amplifiers and such are starting to appear. 


 No comments on the other threads. But shooting down a hoax is totally different subject than thread crapping. It doesnt have any room for "perhaps" or "possibly" like there might be with cables. Claiming that such disc might work is like claiming that world might be flat._

 

Some would argue that there is no possibility for cables.


----------



## MaZa

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Akathisia* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I wasn't commenting on whether or not the Cardas CD works (I've never tried it...), but when you look at the participants in the thread, it's the same people that have a post count based on thread crapping.

 People are worried about new members coming here and being swayed into buying $XXXX cables and tweaks, be I'm more worried about the Head-Fi vets that have actually contributed to this site over the years leaving because of a few members with nothing better to do then try and prove how inteligent they are on a headphones forum on the internet._

 

Thats true. Whenever I end up reading some threads in cable forum there are few familiar faces that constantly SEEM to appear on the vocal side of skeptics. But perhaps they have a point in their vocalnes, sometimes. On that disc subject, that is definetly deserved. This is actually first time I take a complete position on skeptics siden and makes me feel sick that such lies are even tried to push around here...

 But anyway, back to cables.


----------



## meat01

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *UseName* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Saying stuff doesn't work isn't thread crapping. It's just being skeptical._

 

If you read some of those threads, some or a lot of the posts are thread crapping and not just being a skeptic.

 Vocheda asked if anyone had experience with the myrtal blocks and gave his experience and people rudely bashed him and the product without trying it and others questioned the concept or how the product could improve sound. There is a difference.


----------



## meat01

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *UseName* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Some would argue that there is no possibility for cables._

 

And they are free to argue in threads where cable differences are questioned. It is frowned upon to argue in threads where someone just wants to express their opinion of a particular cable or they just want a recommendations for a cable.


 Sorry I pulled a Steve with 2 threads


----------



## MaZa

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *UseName* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Some would argue that there is no possibility for cables._

 

Perhaps, but since i'm not engineer nor electrician, and have only basic knowledge of electricity, I cant say yay nor nay since I'm not sure of all the sides that MIGHT affect the sound. But as a computer nerd for life, brain working more on digital domain than biology of normal life-owning human... 'nuff said...


----------



## Vul Kuolun

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Akathisia* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_It's not just cables, almost anything that goes under the heading of this sub-forum - Cables, Power, Tweaks, Accessories - get's crapped all over.

Audio Desk System- resurrected this year, and then crapped in

Cardas / Ayre Burn-In CD

Cardas Myrtle Wood Blocks - This thread starts getting crapped in hard around pg. 6

Nordost Thor
_

 

The term "thread crapping" is nothing else than an attempt to devaluate unwanted critical contributions. All the threads started at one point to focus on technological aspects, which usually is the point where someone comes and tells "the believer" that, for example, a CD can not be magnetized or a stock power line filter doesn't cost 3000$ but 200$.
 That's not thread crapping, that's totally on point of the discussions.

 And 90% of all the sceptics-vs-believers discussions are taking place in specifically opened threads, which are obviously by far the most interesting topics in this subforum judging by the numbers of views and replies. 

 Thing is, the participation of "the sceptics" is simply not wished for by a certain group of users including the sponsors , as it disturbes the purpose that hifi-esoterics (mis-)use internet discussion boards for: Asuring one another about their newest acquisitions and boosting their (auto-)suggestions each other.

 This way, the web gets crapped over with useless pseudo-technical claptrap arousing the delusion that hifi is impossible without dropping a small fortune on cables and other useless paraphernalia.

 What you really want is not a forum for "sceptics" (which would be everyone open for the fact that someone just sold you a generic line filter worth 200$ for 3000$), but a forum for people unwilling to deal with any form of criticism on the products they are using.

 The way i see it. Thanks for listening.


----------



## Akathisia

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Vul Kuolun* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_What you really want is not a forum for "sceptics" (which would be everyone open for the fact that someone just sold you a generic line filter worth 200$ for 3000$), but a forum for people unwilling to deal with any form of criticism on the products they are using._

 

 Someone who just dropped $XXXX on a fringe product is not going to see the light that science indicates there is no value in the product, especially not when some genius drops in with a one liner like "Anything more than Blue Jeans Cable is junk". 

 Someone new looking for advice on what kind of cash is required to get a iPod LOD that doesn't take away from the SQ needs to get opinions from all sides.

 Even though I can't stand the Grado sound, I don't go into every Grado appreciation thread and point out why I think they are bad. Now if someone starts a thread saying they like XXXXX music, and they are considering an MS1 or a DT770, I will probably talk about what I think of both products, since I have owned both.

 (just for clarification : I own cables from all over the price range - Blue Jeans to Nordost, and I haven't made any decisions yet.)


----------



## UseName

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *meat01* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_And they are free to argue in threads where cable differences are questioned. It is frowned upon to argue in threads where someone just wants to express their opinion of a particular cable or they just want a recommendations for a cable.


 Sorry I pulled a Steve with 2 threads 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			



_

 

Someone want's an opinion on a $400 power cable.You are saying I am not allowed to say my opinion that it makes no difference and get a $20 power cord. 


  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *MaZa* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Perhaps, but since i'm not engineer nor electrician, and have only basic knowledge of electricity, I cant say yay nor nay since I'm not sure of all the sides that MIGHT affect the sound. But as a computer nerd for life, brain working more on digital domain than biology of normal life-owning human... 'nuff said..._

 

I am an Electrical Engineer. Even still, my opinion is undervalued if I disagree with believers. I'm not allowed to ask for proof. I have to believe the OP's (who i have never met) listening experience. If I say there is little data to support some claims, I am thread crapping... if I ask how a cable was tested, I am thread crapping. 

 It's very frustrating. It feels like my opinion is almost banned from this forum. 

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Vul Kuolun* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The term "thread crapping" is nothing else than an attempt to devaluate unwanted critical contributions. All the threads started at one point to focus on technological aspects, which usually is the point where someone comes and tells "the believer" that, for example, a CD can not be magnetized or a stock power line filter doesn't cost 3000$ but 200$.
 That's not thread crapping, that's totally on point of the discussions.

 And 90% of all the sceptics-vs-believers discussions are taking place in specifically opened threads, which are obviously by far the most interesting topics in this subforum judging by the numbers of views and replies. 

 Thing is, the participation of "the sceptics" is simply not wished for by a certain group of users including the sponsors , as it disturbes the purpose that hifi-esoterics (mis-)use internet discussion boards for: Asuring one another about their newest acquisitions and boosting their (auto-)suggestions each other.

 This way, the web gets crapped over with useless pseudo-technical claptrap arousing the delusion that hifi is impossible without dropping a small fortune on cables and other useless paraphernalia.

 What you really want is not a forum for "sceptics" (which would be everyone open for the fact that someone just sold you a generic line filter worth 200$ for 3000$), but a forum for people unwilling to deal with any form of criticism on the products they are using.

 The way i see it. Thanks for listening._

 

I mostly agree... how about a separate sub forum for listening impressions? A place where you are not allowed to post unless you have hands-on experience with a product.


----------



## 1117

The thing with headphones is that, even though people are on separate camps or teams (Grado, Senn, DT's, Stax, whatever), everyone, and I mean EVERYONE can agree that there is an audible difference between them. The purchases then just become a matter of personal taste.

 However, with cables, this isn't the case at all. It isn't about audible preferences. It is about whether there are audible differences to begin with. I don't see threads where people say "all headphones sound the same." I do see threads on diminishing returns, however. With cables, the irrefutable fact hasn't been established as of yet that they indeed do sound different. Thus, imho, I think the analogy between headphones and cables doesn't have that nice a fit. It seems forced...


----------



## meat01

Quote:


 Someone want's an opinion on a $400 power cable.You are saying I am not allowed to say my opinion that it makes no difference and get a $20 power cord. 
 

A lot of people would consider that a thread crap, or would like to discuss $400 cables without your opinion. I am not saying it is right or wrong, but this is what the non skeptics are complaining about. They have heard that a $20 power cord is just as good, but they do not want to see these kind of posts. People have even stated in their original post that they don't want the kind of posts you just described and people still post it.

  Quote:


 how about a separate sub forum for listening impressions? A place where you are not allowed to post unless you have hands-on experience with a product. 
 

This is kind of like what Jude has proposed except this this forum be that place and there would be a separate sub forum for skeptics to discuss their opinions or scientific evidence and tests.

  Quote:


 I'm not allowed to ask for proof. I have to believe the OP's (who i have never met) listening experience. If I say there is little data to support some claims, I am thread crapping... if I ask how a cable was tested, I am thread crapping.

 It's very frustrating. It feels like my opinion is almost banned from this forum. 
 

I know what you are saying, but you do not have to believe the OPs claims. You just can't question them. Opinions are fine if you have had experience with the product. There are still a lot of threads like this one where people are free to discuss their opinions on tweaks or state that there is no proof cables make a difference.


----------



## Vul Kuolun

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Akathisia* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Even though I can't stand the Grado sound, I don't go into every Grado appreciation thread and point out why I think they are bad_

 

No, you wouldn't, and no "sceptic" would. But you maybe would , if you read something like "grados are superior by the means of their membrane technology based on elfs foreskin." You would. Wouldn't you? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *UseName* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Someone want's an opinion on a $400 power cable.You are saying I am not allowed to say my opinion that it makes no difference and get a $20 power cord. 
 I am an Electrical Engineer. Even still, my opinion is undervalued if I disagree with believers. I'm not allowed to ask for proof. I have to believe the OP's (who i have never met) listening experience. If I say there is little data to support some claims, I am thread crapping... if I ask how a cable was tested, I am thread crapping. 

 It's very frustrating. It feels like my opinion is almost banned from this forum. _

 

Technological knowledge in this forum is low. I'm sorry to say it, but that's how it is. The reason is, technologicaly educated participants usually get scared away with a mixture of personal attacks and telling them "you don't know, you havent listened"- argumentations.


  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *UseName* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I mostly agree... how about a separate sub forum for listening impressions? A place where you are not allowed to post unless you have hands-on experience with a product._

 

Not a bad idea.

 But the first priority would be to exchange the "No DBT"-Sticky for a "No ad hominem attacks please"- sticky.


----------



## MaZa

Quote:


 I am an Electrical Engineer. Even still, my opinion is undervalued if I disagree with believers. I'm not allowed to ask for proof. I have to believe the OP's (who i have never met) listening experience. If I say there is little data to support some claims, I am thread crapping... if I ask how a cable was tested, I am thread crapping.

 It's very frustrating. It feels like my opinion is almost banned from this forum. 
 

Due to my basic understanding on basic idea of electriciy, my toe is on your side. Even my common sense is fighting back, and my earlier post about internals of amplifier or such might reflect it. The metal-lines on the electric boards are also cables in some sense, so if a cable changes sound for the better then shouldnt be all the "cables" inside the amp changed, no electric circuit boards but real cables from point to point, same material as interconnects? And the circuit board conductors are rather thin, as are the legs on parts etc... and the cables that connect the board to jacks are also generally thin and cheap copper wire. A chain is as strong as its weakest link, no? 

 And the jacks/plugs, do they also change sound depending on the material? They are parts in the conductive area of cable, extensions to the core that is, and insulating materials that surround the core has no touch on the plug part, its exposed to open air. And the plug isnt necessarily even same material as the cable core on excotic cables. And the cable core is soldered to the jacks or plugs, which again are connected to each other by nothing but touch friction?

 It just doesnt make sense, electricity is flow of electrons from atom to atom, and they dont know what material they are moving through. The electrons are particles with negative charge and are all similar in atoms, their number is just different depending the atom they are surrounding, am I right? So why would conductive material change the sound? It has been so long, and I can remember all details or if what I remember is accurate.


----------



## Danamr

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Vul Kuolun* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Not a bad idea.

 But the first priority would be to exchange the "No DBT"-Sticky for a "No ad hominem attacks please"- sticky._

 

The real solution is to not have a public forum at all. The reality is that on a public forum, you are always going to have someone who will not play by the rules. 
 There are easy enough ways for discussions to go on, just ignoring the tread crapping for a start can work. Using the ignore feature is another. That does not seem to be enough for some.


----------



## MaZa

Using ignore is a two bladed sword. Its usefull for obvious trolls, but such persons are usually handled by mods eventually. If you ignore person in anger if you happen to feel like ones posts are thread crapping, you cannot see their possible truly useful posts either. Posts that might containt the answer you are looking for from some headphone/amp/source/whatever...


----------



## Gurra1980

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *MaZa* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_So, lets look what electrical device looks like. Probaply everyone of us has opened an amplifier once, or some other electrical device. The electrical signal travels from resistor/transistor/cap/whatever by conductive metal lines. They are also "cables". And usually there are RCA jacks or some other jacks attached by small and thin, cheap wires so the device can be attached to other devices. Now, what cables should do from there is to conduct that signal from that device to another, and do it without resistance etc..., do so flexibly and sometimes bit longer distance and insulate the it from outside interference. But their job is very much the same as is the metal lines inside electric device_

 

X2 This is something for believers to think about. 

 And I think this discussion is meaningless when the DBT-debate is not alowed, just seek the net and you can find numerous of blind testing that show that people (audiophiles, musicians) can't hear any difference.


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Maybe you should take your own advice and listen to some music instead of invading every single thread that in any way shape or form discusses cables with the same diatribe. It starts to wear thin after the 99th time or so._

 

Would you like me to express my own personal opinion about the quality of your posts and your value to this discussion community? I would be happy to do that, but I normally refrain from discussing my own personal opinion of the posters and try to focus on the topic at hand.

 Here's a little taste of my opinion of this particular post of yours... If you want a 14 karat gold plated, solid core, cryo treated example of why these threads seem to derail, you don't have to look farther than your own post quoted right above. I would be happy to go into more detail if you would like me to treat you the same way you just treated me.

 Thanks
 Steve


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *stevenkelby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Is the new forum intended as a dumping ground for all these annoying posts? That would save accusations of censorship_

 

You've got a heaping helping of irony going there, whether you know it or not.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## Wmcmanus

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *cosmopragma* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Today I've searched and read threads for a few hours.
 I don't frequent the cable forum regularly and I was not aware how bad the current state of this subforum often is.I still think that you and your moderator peers are one sided but I agree the problems have to be adressed.

 Also my assumption that if not now than sooner or later any scepticism might be encaged into a trash bin aka sceptics forum is apparently wrong.



 you've answered 

 I think your sarcasm about my drama is well justified and *I have to apologize.*



 I think so.
 Thanks for taking the time to clarify the what and why in this thread.
 Although I'm more on the sceptic side of the fence I for one am now for the change.
 Patrick82, markl et al should have a place where they can discuss their believes in peace without being interrupted by uncalled demands for objective evidence.No one is forced to join them.
 Some will perceive it as a gated community, some might see a ghetto._

 

I didn't realize in your initial post that you we're really keeping up with the cables forum. Really, from any angle that you look at it, what is going on in there isn't terribly productive. Nobody seems to be 'happy' (as it were) and if we can do something to cut down and all of the frustration that people are experiencing on either side of the "great cable debate", then I'm all for it. 

 Head-Fi has always been such a fun place for me to hang out at. Even as a moderator, there really aren't as many unpleasant tasks as people might think there are. For the most part, it's still a fun place for me and I'll do anything I can to help keep it that way for you too! 

 I did take some offense to some of the things that you were saying in your initial post. At least I thought they were a bit extreme in terms of what you were projecting as the consequences of separating the cables threads into two different sub forums. I really don't think it will turn out as bad as some people seem to think it will. In fact, I think the discussions in both sub forums could be quite robust. 

 As others have said, this same strategy has worked in our music forum. If someone wants to start a thread looking for rap music recommendations, or saying "check out so and so's new album" it's considered a thread crap (and thus not allowed) for another member to jump in and start trashing rap music in general terms, like "rap sucks" or whatever. Of course we allow as much latitude as possible, so long as people aren't joining the thread with the sole purpose of antagonizing those who are enjoying the chat they're having about the topic at hand. 

 In other words, if someone were to make a statement like, "I've tried some rap, but maybe I'm missing something or it's just not my cup of tea..." and then went on to say, "I'm not discrediting rap in general, I just don't 'get it' for the most part in terms of the culture of rap music", then this could lead to a rather interesting side discussion that all parties involved enjoy being a part of. The rap lover who started the thread can then talk about where the roots of rap come from and how it has, in turn, influenced other music that has stemmed from it, that maybe the rap newbie/skeptic does enjoy, and thus it helps him to make some connections.

 Not that this specific example has occurred (to my knowledge) but it would certainly be fine because it's respectful and not antagonistic. Unfortunately we can't seem to achieve this same sort of respect when it comes to cables threads because people seem to have different intentions when they jump in with their 2 cents. They're not looking for suggestions or trying to learn from someone else's point of view or trying to progress the discussion in any meaningful way. Instead, they're trying to derail the thread, make it contentious, get into the same debate (in 100 different shapes, sizes and colors) all over again, and grind it straight into the ground.

 How many times do these same "Can/do cables make a difference?" discussions really need to take place? Do they have to occur in every thread? Or are some people happy to be able to cite several threads where there are no obvious signs (remaining, anyway) of thread derailment, and thus say, "See, it's Ok, because it doesn't happen in every thread"?

 I just think we'll all be more at ease when we can put these types of conversations into their own place, and hopefully make that a happy place unto itself with plenty of opportunity for those so inclined to bring forward all sorts interesting topics that are centered around science and proof and testing methods and perceptual biases, measurement issues, and so on. I know that I'd learn a lot from reading these sorts of threads, so long as they're not interjected in the middle of a Seen replacement cable comparison thread where the topic is intended to be more focused.

 In any case, my sincere apologies for reacting with some attitude to your comments. I'm glad that you now have a better context concerning the nature of this discussion. I also hope that nothing I may have said was too terribly off putting. As direct and personal as I can sometimes come across as being when I react to certain posts, more often than not it's nothing personal at all. I'm often simply confounded that a senior member with thousands of posts and years of participation here would suddenly decide to leave Head-Fi because of one small decision we might make to help redirect the forums to get them back on target and to return to our more peaceful ways.


----------



## Gurra1980

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *MaZa* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_It just doesnt make sense, electricity is flow of electrons from atom to atom, and they dont know what material they are moving through. The electrons are particles with negative charge and are all similar in atoms, their number is just different depending the atom they are surrounding, am I right? So why would conductive material change the sound? It has been so long, and I can remember all details or if what I remember is accurate._

 

Your right, but they don't surround the atom, they are a part of it, surrounding protons and neutrons. if you put a certain amount of electrons in one end of a cable the same amount jumps out of the other side. 

 But maybe some magic is surronding these electrons that sience don't know about if nordost has made the cable 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	





 (i'm not an engineer or anything, just interested) 


 LOL this is like a debate between sientists and creationists.


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *meat01* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_A lot of people would consider that a thread crap, or would like to discuss $400 cables without your opinion._

 

If they don't want other people's (often differing) opinions, they should write a book or create a blog and turn the comments off. This is a discussion board. We are here to discuss things.

 No real discussion consists of just people who agree with each other. Disagreement isn't the problem. The problem is the inability to debate fairly and honestly.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## MaZa

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Gurra1980* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Your right, but they don't surround the atom, they are a part of it, surronding protons and neutrons. if you put a certain amount of electrons in one end of a cable the same amount jumps out of the other side. 

 But maybe some magic is surronding these electrons that sience don't know about if nordost has made it.


 (i'm not an engineer or anything, just interested) 


 LOL this is like a debate between sientists and creationists._

 



 Thats right! I got them mixed up. Now I have bit clearer memory. We usually think that electricity flows from + to -, the electrons are actually moving from - to +. An electron moves forward, leaving a charge behind, and another electron from another atom comes to replace it, leaving a charge behind etc... A closed electric circle that is. It matters not what atom it is, as long as its able to conduct it forward. As barebone as it can get, but in laymans terms thats how it works.


----------



## Wmcmanus

Quote:


 Maybe you should take your own advice and listen to some music instead of invading every single thread that in any way shape or form discusses cables with the same diatribe. It starts to wear thin after the 99th time or so. 
 

Quoted for truth.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Would you like me to express my own personal opinion about the quality of your posts and your value to this discussion community? I would be happy to do that, but I normally refrain from discussing my own personal opinion of the posters and try to focus on the topic at hand.

 Here's a little taste of my opinion of this particular post of yours... If you want a 14 karat gold plated, solid core, cryo treated example of why these threads seem to derail, you don't have to look farther than your own post quoted right above. I would be happy to go into more detail if you would like me to treat you the same way you just treated me.

 Thanks
 Steve_

 

What is so offensive about what I've said? It's true. Although I have not actually counted the times, and 99 may be an exaggeration, you tend to do a sarcastic drive by post in just about every subjective cable thread I've read for the past 3 years. How many times in how many different threads where the topic is not "whether" cables can/do make a difference, do you think you need to make the same points regarding your opinion on the matter before you think people will understand your point of view? 

 Then when they get upset, you suggest that they relax and listen to some music rather than wasting their time comparing cables, or whatever. You could listen to some music rather than constantly telling them that cables make no difference.

 If that is somehow treating you unfairly, then I stand accused and am guilty as charged.


----------



## Wmcmanus

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Vul Kuolun* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The term "thread crapping" is nothing else than an attempt to devaluate unwanted critical contributions. All the threads started at one point to focus on technological aspects, which usually is the point where someone comes and tells "the believer" that, for example, a CD can not be magnetized or a stock power line filter doesn't cost 3000$ but 200$.
 That's not thread crapping, that's totally on point of the discussions.

 And 90% of all the sceptics-vs-believers discussions are taking place in specifically opened threads, which are obviously by far the most interesting topics in this subforum judging by the numbers of views and replies. 

 Thing is, the participation of "the sceptics" is simply not wished for by a certain group of users including the sponsors , as it disturbes the purpose that hifi-esoterics (mis-)use internet discussion boards for: Asuring one another about their newest acquisitions and boosting their (auto-)suggestions each other.

 This way, the web gets crapped over with useless pseudo-technical claptrap arousing the delusion that hifi is impossible without dropping a small fortune on cables and other useless paraphernalia.

 What you really want is not a forum for "sceptics" (which would be everyone open for the fact that someone just sold you a generic line filter worth 200$ for 3000$), but a forum for people unwilling to deal with any form of criticism on the products they are using.

 The way i see it. Thanks for listening._

 

This is an interesting point of view, and quite well expressed. I can say with certainty that this is not the intent of separating the cable discussions into 2 sub forums, and likewise hope that this will not the consequence.


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_What is so offensive about what I've said?_

 

I'm happy to fill you in.

 I am a participant in this forum. My participation, and the participation of other "regular posters" is what pushes up the page views and keeps the momentum of discussion flowing. This is my job here, and I enjoy it. I discuss on topic on a variety of subjects in a variety of sub-forums within Head-Fi. I'm not perfect by any means, but I am a lot more even tempered and polite than some of the people around me. I'm even being polite and respectful right now.

 OK. Your turn. You are a moderator of this forum. Your job is to encourage the discussion and keep it flowing on topic. Your job isn't to define the debate, just to act as a referee. When people make a disagreement personal, it's your job to shepherd them back to the topic and prevent the escalation of personal attacks before they flame up into a real problem.

 OK. We've defined who we are now. Now let's outline the situation we find ourselves in here. You complain because I post too much. You also expressed a personal opinion as to the value of my on topic participation and pushed a disagreement about the topic being discussed towards a personal attack. Instead of encouraging discussion, you are discouraging it. Instead of moderating, you are trying to control the discussion. Instead of trying to defuse personal attacks, you are instigating them

 It seems to me that I'm doing a reasonably good job of being a participant in this forum, and you are doing a poor one of being a moderator. Normally, I would just keep my mouth shut and let you run your business any way you want to run it. But you expressed a personal opinion about the value of my contributions and invited me to express my personal opinion about yours. You've got it now.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## UseName

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I'm happy to fill you in.

 I am a participant in this forum. My participation, and the participation of other "regular posters" is what pushes up the page views and keeps the momentum of discussion flowing. This is my job here, and I enjoy it. I discuss on topic on a variety of subjects in a variety of sub-forums within Head-Fi. I'm not perfect by any means, but I am a lot more even tempered and polite than some of the people around me. I'm even being polite and respectful right now.

 OK. Your turn. You are a moderator of this forum. Your job is to encourage the discussion and keep it flowing on topic. Your job isn't to define the debate, just to act as a referee. When people make a disagreement personal, it's your job to shepherd them back to the topic and prevent the escalation of personal attacks before they flame up into a real problem.

 OK. We've defined who we are now. Now let's outline the situation we find ourselves in here. You complain because I post too much. You also expressed a personal opinion as to the value of my on topic participation and pushed a disagreement about the topic being discussed towards a personal attack. Instead of encouraging discussion, you are discouraging it. Instead of moderating, you are trying to control the discussion. Instead of trying to defuse personal attacks, you are instigating them

 It seems to me that I'm doing a reasonably good job of being a participant in this forum, and you are doing a poor one of being a moderator. Normally, I would just keep my mouth shut and let you run your business any way you want to run it. But you expressed a personal opinion about the value of my contributions and invited me to express my personal opinion about yours. You've got it now.

 See ya
 Steve_

 

Very well and politely said.


----------



## Kees

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I'm happy to fill you in.

 I am a participant in this forum. My participation, and the participation of other "regular posters" is what pushes up the page views and keeps the momentum of discussion flowing. This is my job here, and I enjoy it. I discuss on topic on a variety of subjects in a variety of sub-forums within Head-Fi. I'm not perfect by any means, but I am a lot more even tempered and polite than some of the people around me. I'm even being polite and respectful right now.

 OK. Your turn. You are a moderator of this forum. Your job is to encourage the discussion and keep it flowing on topic. Your job isn't to define the debate, just to act as a referee. When people make a disagreement personal, it's your job to shepherd them back to the topic and prevent the escalation of personal attacks before they flame up into a real problem.

 OK. We've defined who we are now. Now let's outline the situation we find ourselves in here. You complain because I post too much. You also expressed a personal opinion as to the value of my on topic participation and pushed a disagreement about the topic being discussed towards a personal attack. Instead of encouraging discussion, you are discouraging it. Instead of moderating, you are trying to control the discussion. Instead of trying to defuse personal attacks, you are instigating them

 It seems to me that I'm doing a reasonably good job of being a participant in this forum, and you are doing a poor one of being a moderator. Normally, I would just keep my mouth shut and let you run your business any way you want to run it. But you expressed a personal opinion about the value of my contributions and invited me to express my personal opinion about yours. You've got it now.

 See ya
 Steve_

 

I consider this post polite nor respectful.
 You tell Wayne what he is and what he has to do.
 Then you say "we've defined who we are now"..... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 Then you tel us how good you are for this forum and how badly Wayne does the job you have apointed him to do.

 I'm afraid you're so full of yourself you've lost sight of the rest of the world.


----------



## UseName

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Of course we allow as much latitude as possible, so long as people aren't joining the thread with the sole purpose of antagonizing those who are enjoying the chat they're having about the topic at hand. _

 

This is the part I take issue with... It seems like you are basically saying that as long as I share the same opinion as the OP I am free to post. However, if my opinion differs, I will be redirected to another section where I can be with 'my own kind'. 

 I don't understand why there needs to be a double standard for cables. People disagree with reviews all the time. By not allowing comments to an aspect of a review, you are censoring people. Maybe that is what you want...I don't know...maybe it's the sponsors. But the act of denying an opinion is censorship and it devalues that opinion. 

 If I was in the market for a new cable and was looking at cable A priced at $400. Some may say it is a good choice, some would recommend cable B for that price range and my system, and some would say just get a $20 Walmart special. All these are opinions and IMO allowed to be posted without fear of being condemned or cast-out. 

 The value of the post should be left to the reader to determine. The posts that are well written, with sound reasoning, and by those that have a good amount of reputation will most likely be the ones that are most valued. If someone disagrees, they are free to question those opinions. The solid opinions, will be able to back up their post... or if they don't feel like it is worth their time, simply agree to disagree. 

 This is how it works in many, many forums across the internet.


----------



## Vul Kuolun

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_This is an interesting point of view, and quite well expressed. I can say with certainty that this is not the intent of separating the cable discussions into 2 sub forums, and likewise hope that this will not the consequence._

 

This is not the reaction i was expecting, really. I'm quite amazed.
 My sincere respect for your efforts in taking a look at it from the other side of the fence.


----------



## UseName

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Kees* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I consider this post polite nor respectful.
 You tell Wayne what he is and what he has to do.
 Then you say "we've defined who we are now"..... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Then you tel us how good you are for this forum and how badly Wayne does the job you have apointed him to do.

 I'm afraid you're so full of yourself you've lost sight of the rest of the world._

 

Wayne asked Steve for his opinion... Steve gave him his opinion on what he thinks moderators should be doing. 

 What do you want him to do? lie? Given the fact he asked for Steve's opinion, it's polite and respectful. 

 EDIT: It's like asking a friend if he likes your shirt, then getting mad at him when he says the colors are too loud. 

 Note: Personally, I think they should have be taking this sort of discussion to a PM, but I am not moderating.


----------



## Kees

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *UseName* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_...
 EDIT: It's like asking a friend if he likes your shirt, then getting mad at him when he says the colors are too loud._

 

Not quite. If I ask a friend if he likes my shirt I want to know if he likes it. I don't want him to tell me what shirts to wear.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *UseName* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_...Note: Personally, I think they should have be taking this sort of discussion to a PM, but I am not moderating._

 

I think I agree with you. 
 [size=xx-small]_Now_ you scared me...[/size]


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I didn't realize in your initial post that you we're really keeping up with the cables forum. Really, from any angle that you look at it, what is going on in there isn't terribly productive. Nobody seems to be 'happy' (as it were) and if we can do something to cut down and all of the frustration that people are experiencing on either side of the "great cable debate", then I'm all for it. 

 How many times do these same "Can/do cables make a difference?" discussions really need to take place? Do they have to occur in every thread? Or are some people happy to be able to cite several threads where there are no obvious signs (remaining, anyway) of thread derailment, and thus say, "See, it's Ok, because it doesn't happen in every thread"?

 I just think we'll all be more at ease when we can put these types of conversations into their own place, and hopefully make that a happy place unto itself with plenty of opportunity for those so inclined to bring forward all sorts interesting topics that are centered around science and proof and testing methods and perceptual biases, measurement issues, and so on. I know that I'd learn a lot from reading these sorts of threads, so long as they're not interjected in the middle of a Seen replacement cable comparison thread where the topic is intended to be more focused._

 


  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *UseName* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_This is the part I take issue with... It seems like you are basically saying that as long as I share the same opinion as the OP I am free to post. However, if my opinion differs, I will be redirected to another section where I can be with 'my own kind'. 

 I don't understand why there needs to be a double standard for cables. People disagree with reviews all the time. By not allowing comments to an aspect of a review, you are censoring people. Maybe that is what you want...I don't know...maybe it's the sponsors. But the act of denying an opinion is censorship and it devalues that opinion._

 

you are a noob; you don't understand the struggle we had to put up with the same few thread crappers (oh..they call themselves the objectivist) for years over all those meaningless bickering;

 Oh..and FYI this is a *private *forum, mod can impose whatever rules they want and if you don't like it you can just leave.

 For you objective activists/thread crappers, why don't you all just move on down to Audiogon or Audioasylum and continue your crusade 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 ............... over there you will truly understand what it means to get your ass handed to you


----------



## UseName

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_you are a noob; you don't understand the struggle we had to put up with the same few thread crappers (oh..they call themselves the objectivist) for years over all those meaningless bickering;

 Oh..and FYI this is a *private *forum, mod can impose whatever rules they want and if you don't like it you can just leave._

 

Thanks, please keep labeling me with a derogatory term because of my low post count. I OBVIOUSLY have no clue what is going on. This discussion is not unique to this forum. 

  Quote:


 Oh..and FYI this is a *private *forum, mod can impose whatever rules they want and if you don't like it you can just leave. 
 

Alright sure, I will give you that. But I agreed to the TOC and I have been granted access to post. 

 Your attitude towards newcomers is extremely sharp. I'm sorry for not having the same opinion as you.


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *UseName* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Alright sure, I will give you that. But I agreed to the TOC and I have been granted access to post. _

 

to post is a privilege not a right; please take your activist messages elsewhere.

 The thread crappers here are nothing but nuisance.


----------



## yotacowboy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I'm happy to fill you in.

 I am a participant in this forum. My participation, and the participation of other "regular posters" is what pushes up the page views and keeps the momentum of discussion flowing. This is my job here, and I enjoy it. I discuss on topic on a variety of subjects in a variety of sub-forums within Head-Fi. I'm not perfect by any means, but I am a lot more even tempered and polite than some of the people around me. I'm even being polite and respectful right now.

 OK. Your turn. You are a moderator of this forum. Your job is to encourage the discussion and keep it flowing on topic. Your job isn't to define the debate, just to act as a referee. When people make a disagreement personal, it's your job to shepherd them back to the topic and prevent the escalation of personal attacks before they flame up into a real problem.

 OK. We've defined who we are now. Now let's outline the situation we find ourselves in here. You complain because I post too much. You also expressed a personal opinion as to the value of my on topic participation and pushed a disagreement about the topic being discussed towards a personal attack. Instead of encouraging discussion, you are discouraging it. Instead of moderating, you are trying to control the discussion. Instead of trying to defuse personal attacks, you are instigating them

 It seems to me that I'm doing a reasonably good job of being a participant in this forum, and you are doing a poor one of being a moderator. Normally, I would just keep my mouth shut and let you run your business any way you want to run it. But you expressed a personal opinion about the value of my contributions and invited me to express my personal opinion about yours. You've got it now.

 See ya
 Steve_

 


 Steve,

 See, here's the problem:

 You've posted parts of your personal history with audio here - explaining how you were once mentored by older, presumably wiser individuals. You've also presented this story as the reason for your sometimes vehement dismissal of other people's opinions here. You (in my opinion) have assumed the role of mentor here - you're goal is to TRY to inform people that have questions about things. Unfortunately, the role of "mentor" requires a much different tactic than you utilize.

 Steve, if you're goal is to educate, then educate. It's a difficult tactic... I'd suggest moving away from posts on a bulletin board and setting up your own website as a resource. But it's a LOT of work. However, I'd love to see all the objective data you've amassed in one place, seriously. (EDIT: I'm serious like a heart attack, here. And as a gesture of good faith, I've got some experience in website development, and could point you in a couple directions, should you like some help.)

 if your goal is to shield certain people from varying opinions (like a parent with child), such as those opinions as abhorrent and idiotic (to you) as "subjective decision making" with regards to esoteric audio gear, this tactic is unfortunately flawed as well. It is manufacturing belief, and hypocritical at best.

 If your goal here is just to make your opinion known - I think you've done a splendid job.

 If your goal here is to discuss something - I have to ask, to what end?

 Would it please you if there was one single, and final thread on Head-fi that stated, clearly:

 "It has been conclusively determined that one shall not spend money on anything but the most modest system for musical playback - and therefore, there is nothing left to chat about here. If it doesn't measure flat, buy an EQ."

 Or better yet -

 "If you have no proof of what you hear, you should keep your mouth shut. It's just placebo."

 There's not much left to discuss, right? Pure *monologue.*


----------



## Gurra1980

Everything is thread crapping in this thread now. I think I'll do some crap to. 

 Crap crap.


----------



## chesebert

I am an EE and I can hear a difference in cables; I can think of at least 10 theories on why; and no i am not going to prove anything.....

 I am not buying hi-fi equipment to get a better sound per se, I am buying hi-fi to acquire an experience. If $400 cable gives me a better experience than $10 cable I will buy that. The only measurement I need is how good the cable sounds to me...not anyone else..just me. 

 Hi-Fi is just like food.....think about it....(maybe I should have someone prove why durian taste good or why the 1000-year-old egg is delicious 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 .... even better why don't we scientifically figure out how to make _an objectively _better tasting food.....that must be a really worthwhile effort!


----------



## Riboge

Yotacowboy, well said!


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Kees* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I don't think we're here to win a race or something, but to share experiences and to discuss them. No winning or losing in order._

 

The winnig was an analogy of that there will be no different opinions...Same as in the skeptics forum. Have you realized of what they will indeed discuss there, if everybody agree in that there is, or there is no, differences in the cables? There will be no discussion at all, it is monologue, in order to have a discussion you need to have different opinions flowing, if everybody agree on the same, just move over, we have no further discussion...Thati s stupid ot open that section, just for the sake of isolate the beleivers, and the non beleivers...


----------



## Kees

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Riboge* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Yotacowboy, well said!_

 

X2.
 Yes, absolutely.


----------



## markl

Quote:


 The term "thread crapping" is nothing else than an attempt to devaluate unwanted critical contributions. 
 

 This made fall out of my chair in hysterics. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 "Excuse me Miss, just butting in here, I couldn't help overhearing your conversation about electric cars. You know they're inefficient and generate more greenhouse gases than a gas-powered car, and by the way, there's no scientific proof of Global Warming so stop patting yourself on the back for being "green". Oh, and by the way, those pants make you look fat."

 She slaps Vul Kuolun's face.


 "Hey! Why'd you do that? Don't devalue my unwanted critical contributions!"


----------



## 1117




----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I am an EE and I can hear a difference in cables; I can think of at least 10 theories on why; and no *I am not going to prove anything*....._

 

ROFLMAO...OK:

 They can say: 

 I'm not an EE, I can not hear the differences in cables, and I can think on 100 theories oh why they will not sound different (BTW closer to reality) and they indeed do not have to prove a negative...

 That is an easy position IMO, that is the same position we have seen for decades, right? 

 My question is: Let's assume that someone, (you or anybody else) decide one day to offer us the privilege, of being the first human beings in earth, in hearing the facts behind the differences in sound in cables. Are you sure that someone will be able to, using one of these 10 theories, or maybe at that time (future), 100 more theories???

 The sad truth till now, is not that *you are not going to prove it* the real truth is that *you can not prove it*, with any of those theories on hand, the same way nobody have been able to do it till now, in more than 100 years of cable existence in earth (maybe an exaggeration but who knows), nothing wrong on that, lack of knowledge? lack of instruments? or maybe they are indeed not so quantitative? but the problem is that for each one of these theories, you will find others that will prove the opposite...and that will say for example that for audible freq, they are negligible...

 One that crossed my mind, the so called skin effect, that they mention so frequent, or that the Teflon is better than other dielectrics, but to what extend you will *hear* the benefits, for example...

 Keep in mind that given the relevance of this topic in modern electronics and audio, I do believe that the first human being able to quantify and demonstrate those differences exist, and how to measure them, will be an instant candidate for a Nobel Prize..AND WILL REVOLUTION THE CABLE INDUSTRY.


----------



## JohnFerrier

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I am an EE and I can hear a difference in cables; I can think of at least 10 theories on why; and no i am not going to prove anything....._

 

No need to list ten theories. What is your best theory?


----------



## sean3089

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Drag0n* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Youngins arent the only ones that dont believe in cables. The geezers at Stereophile Magazine and other highend mags also argue the point between themselves. I believe Julian Hirsh was a disbeliever in cable voodoo himself, and he was old and i think he died with the belief. 
 So now that theyre disbelievers, they get to go to low-end hell and listen to low rez mp3's out of ipod ear buds for all eternity when they die. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

Julian Hirsh thought all amplifiers sounded the same too!


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_ROFLMAO...OK:

 They can say: 

 I'm not an EE, I can not hear the differences in cables, and I can think on 100 theories oh why they will not sound different (BTW closer to reality) and they indeed do not have to prove a negative...

 That is an easy position IMO, that is the same position we have seen for decades, right? 

 My question is: Let's assume that someone, (you or anybody else) decide one day to offer us the privilege, of being the first human beings in earth, in hearing the facts behind the differences in sound in cables. Are you sure that someone will be able to, using one of these 10 theories, or maybe at that time (future), 100 more theories???

 The sad truth till now, is not that *you are not going to prove it* the real truth is that *you can not prove it*, with any of those theories on hand, the same way nobody have been able to do it till now, in more than 100 years of cable existence in earth (maybe an exaggeration but who knows), nothing wrong on that, lack of knowledge? lack of instruments? or maybe they are indeed not so quantitative? but the problem is that for each one of these theories, you will find others that will prove the opposite...and that will say for example that for audible freq, they are negligible...

 One that crossed my mind, the so called skin effect, that they mention so frequent, or that the Teflon is better than other dielectrics, but to what extend you will *hear* the benefits, for example...

 Keep in mind that given the relevance of this topic in modern electronics and audio, I do believe that the first human being able to quantify and demonstrate those differences exist, and how to measure them, will be an instant candidate for a Nobel Prize..._

 

Let me know when you can come up with $20M and I will put together a team of researchers for this project.

 Skin effect is not one of my theories unless you are talking about Mhz signals. think along the lines of work function, junction, bounding, valence, quantum theories, electric/magnetic field, electron momentum.


----------



## Kees

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The winnig was an analogy of that there will be no different opinions...Same as in the skeptics forum. Have you realized of what they will indeed discuss there, if everybody agree in that there is, or there is no, differences in the cables? There will be no discussion at all, it is monologue, in order to have a discussion you need to have different opinions flowing, if everybody agree on the same, just move over, we have no further discussion...Thati s stupid ot open that section, just for the sake of isolate the beleivers, and the non beleivers..._

 

I think this forum would quickly become the "snake-oil-busters" forum. No lack of subjects in that area I think.


----------



## yotacowboy

just to add one more bit of thought, I would absolutely love to see some fellow head-fiers contribute to a cable skeptics forum with some validated, peer-reviewed findings which support their position. With this I'd love to see some of the rebuttals. That, to me, is the function of the forum split, if there were to be one.

 I come here to learn about things - more often than not I seek out information on my own, using the search function, rather than posting a question which may have already been covered previously. Right now, there's a bunch of bickering, but very little actual data (in fully reviewed and published form) available here.

 If I'm seeking an honest, subjective evaluation of a particular cable in a particular listener's system, with all the inherent biases, I've got a decent place to find that. Objective data? not so much. Anybody got a network analyzer? I'd LOVE to see some plots (Cardas GRef vs. Monoprice!)!!! Give me data!!!


----------



## UseName

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *markl* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_This made fall out of my chair in hysterics. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 "Excuse me Miss, just butting in here, I couldn't help overhearing your conversation about electric cars. You know they're inefficient and generate more greenhouse gases than a gas-powered car, and by the way, there's no scientific proof of Global Warming so stop patting yourself on the back for being "green". Oh, and by the way, those pants make you look fat."

 She slaps Vul Kuolun's face.


 "Hey! Why'd you do that? Don't devalue my unwanted critical contributions!"_

 

This is a message board. Not someone's private conversation.


----------



## JohnFerrier

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Let me know when you can come up with $20M and I will put together a team of researchers for this project.

 Skin effect is not one of my theories unless you are talking about Mhz signals. think along the lines of work function, junction, bounding, valence, quantum theories, electric/magnetic field, electron momentum._

 

What do you think of the theory that other parts of the brain are involved in judgement of sound quality, beyond purely the auditory system?


 .


----------



## 1117

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *JohnFerrier* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_What do you think of the theory that other parts of the brain are involved in judgement of sound quality, beyond purely the auditory system?


 ._

 

That's the problem, no one wants to deal with theories. We need cold hard facts to sway the public opinion to one side or the other.


----------



## JohnFerrier

What do you think of the cold hard fact that other parts of the brain are involved in judgement of sound quality, beyond purely the auditory system?


 .


----------



## 1117

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *JohnFerrier* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_What do you think of the cold hard fact that other parts of the brain are involved in judgement of sound quality, beyond purely the auditory system?


 ._

 

Dude, this rephrasing of your post made my day... lol


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Let me know when you can come up with $20M and I will put together a team of researchers for this project._

 

Well some of you seem to have far more to invest in that project....
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 What about the multiple companies that sell cables for the cost of a new car, that provide no info about the products that are sold at all, just pure crappy speculations of I do not know how this work but it does (yeah right...!!! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




)

 Also do not forget that the bet is still there for 1 million of buckaros, to who can blindly detect the difference between $7,250 Pear Anjou cables and their Monster Cable equivalent...all you have to do is buy the Pear Anjoy, and a pair of monsters, and take it to James Randy office for the spin what are you affraid off, what is $8000.00 in comparison to 1 million...the fact is that at the precise moment, everybody backed up...Extrange eh?

 I think that given that some of you claim to detect minuscules differences in a digital domain, and in power cables, that will be a piece of cake, being directly in the signal path, and being so noticeable, the difference in the quality of manufacture...


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *JohnFerrier* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_What do you think of the cold hard fact that other parts of the brain are involved in judgement of sound quality, beyond purely the auditory system?


 ._

 

Who said that is not the brain, IMO it is 100%. The brain is the only responsible till other thing is offered...


----------



## JohnFerrier

.


----------



## 3x331m

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *yotacowboy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_ I'd LOVE to see some plots (Cardas GRef vs. Monoprice!)!!! Give me data!!!_

 

I've always consider music listening an art rather than science.

 There is a major improvement when you upgrade from a $10 cable to a $200 cable. The sound quality improvement is obvious to most people. This is a situation when we have a low quality material with poor construction comparing to a well designed, better construction with better quality material.

 However, when we upgrade to a $500 cable which is also well designed, better contruction and material, we (A few with golden ears) might hear very little improvement, and the rest of us might not hear any improvement at all. Is this snake oil ? It's up to you how you call it. I'd call it the ultimate point of diminishing return, where you very high cost/investment with little or no gain.

 Personally, I'd trash any IC cable sold for $10 over the counters. However, I could not justify to pay for any IC cable which costs more than $200. My ears could not hear enough difference in sound quality improvement to convince myself that it's worth the investment.

 That's just me. You might have the golden ears and its your money. You'd be the one to determine if cables those cost more than $200 are worthy for your systems.


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *3x331m* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_There is a major improvement when you upgrade from a $10 cable to a $200 cable. *The sound quality improvement is obvious to most people. * This is a situation when we have a low quality material with poor construction comparing to a well designed, better construction with better quality material._

 

I can tell you, that do not be so sure that *it will be so obvious for most people*, they will tell you so, that is different, but again the only way to know if it is true or not, well.....you know what it is, OK?....Just see Edwood thread...only one "guessed" correctly in which was the cheap IC's from Rat Shack...


----------



## yotacowboy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_ 
 Also do not forget that the bet is still there for 1 million of buckaros, to who can blindly detect the difference between $7,250 Pear Anjou cables and their Monster Cable equivalent...all you have to do is buy the Pear Anjoy, and a pair of monsters, and take it to James Randy office for the spin what are you affraid off, what is $8000.00 in comparison to 1 million...the fact is that at the precise moment, everybody backed up...Extrange eh?_

 

See, if you'd actually looked into this a little more, you'll likely find A LOT of speculation from both sides of the aisle as to whether James Randi and his foundation actually has anything to say.

 Making the statement (or inference) that because a company chooses not to participate in James Randi's shindig, they are inherently snake-oil salesmen is fallacious.

 As I understand it, there have been several requests to apply Randi's testing methods outside his organization, as the stipulations required by Randi's organization surrounding the actual "million dollar test" remove a significant amount of objectivity from the tests themselves. It's a no-win situation in the pursuit of objective science, IMHO. Randi's just as much a snake oil salesmen as the cable companies, by extending your assertions. Simply put, if an experiment is not repeatable, it's not valid.

 Tell you what, I'm going to give you a test, in private, with only you and my experimenters in the room. I reserve the sole right to make any conclusions or data from the test available to the public. You must waive all rights to any conclusions or any data and the distribution thereof in order to attempt the test. I reserve the right to determine whether you passed the test. I also reserve the right to keep my methods hidden - otherwise you might cheat. Sound like a fair deal? Oh, and if you pass my test, I'll give you a million bucks. Did I mention I reserve the right to call the whole thing off for any reason?


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *UseName* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_This is a message board. Not someone's private conversation._

 

this is a private message board; just like private discussions between the members.


----------



## chesebert

why don't people hate expensive headphones? 

 Because you know..the $1000, $2000 or $5000 headphone measures no better than the $100; the only difference is what you hear with no objective data to back that up. 





















*For the ultimate finishing move*









*objectively speaking HE90 is much worse than KSC55 (look at those terrible distortions!)....HE90 is therefore pure snake oil..how can anyone in their right mind be justified to pay for any headphone that cost more than KSC55.......???* _Would the activists please answer this question?? And why do most activists own headphones that cost more than KSC55?? pure hypocrites _

 I think we should hate expensive amp too. because it doesn't take much to drive 300ohm cans, especially the tube amps; they measure like POS

 I think we also should hate expansive CDP, because most modern cheap DVD player has just as good error correction as the expansive models. And many expansive CDP uses the same opamp as the cheap crap; and the expansive CDP measures no better.

 let's just hate everything hi-end audio related because they are all snake oil. Objectively speaking your ipod is the last thing you need to enjoy music...(the ipod cans measure 20hz - 20khz..its displayed right on the box!)

 I think *Sovkiller *should get rid of his Edition9 because it measures no better than the $50 cans, its made of cheap plastic, and it sounds horrible; you could have saved $950!!! I am sorry you have wasted all those money for nothing.


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *yotacowboy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_See, if you'd actually looked into this a little more, you'll likely find A LOT of speculation from both sides of the isle as to whether James Randi and his foundation actually has anything to say.

 Making the statement (or inference) that because a company chooses not to participate in James Randi's shindig, they are inherently snake-oil salesmen is fallacious.

 As I understand it, there have been several requests to apply Randi's testing methods outside his organization, as the stipulations required by Randi's organization surrounding the actual "million dollar test" remove a significant amount of objectivity from the tests themselves. It's a no-win situation in the pursuit of objective science, IMHO. Randi's just as much a snake oil salesmen as the cable companies, by extending your assertions. Simply put, if an experiment is not repeatable, it's not valid.

 Tell you what, I'm going to give you a test, in private, with only you and my experimenters in the room. I reserve the sole right to make any conclusions or data from the test available to the public. You must waive all rights to any conclusions or any data and the distribution thereof in order to attempt the test. I reserve the right to determine whether you passed the test. I also reserve the right to keep my methods hidden - otherwise you might cheat. Sound like a fair deal? Oh, and if you pass my test, I'll give you a million bucks._

 

No, I read all the arguments behind that, even I followed that thread about this topic, and honestly IMO was more that Pear got pissed with all Randy requirements, than anything else...but let's say that all what you said was exactly what Randi make you sign for....it is a million bucks, as opposed to loose what, just being there...I'm talking of the guy, not Pair Audio?

 Also I never say they are snake oil becasue of that, just that I found the backing very curious and convenient...but to me honestly they were snake oil far before that, there is no way in earth to justify such prices for any cable...(maybe something a little more complex, with some technology behind, sources, amps, drivers, a car, but for just a pair of cables???) 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 As the saying says, you can one all the time, and you can full everybody once, but you can not fool everybody, all the time...

 If Randi's arguments are so shady, they should be well known by know, and by everybody...But he still has some credibility, in some circles, what indicaters that we are again in front of some speculations from some of the Randy detractors...

 I think that this experiment failed becasue both were guilty to some extend, is part and part, part from him to loose the experiment, and the million, and part from the opposte field of not being able to accomplish...but both are at fault...


----------



## slwiser

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_why don't people hate expensive headphones? 

 Because you know..the $1000, $2000 or $5000 headphone measures no better than the $100; the only difference is what you hear with no objective data to back that up. 

 I think we should hate expensive amp too. because it doesn't take much to drive 300ohm cans, especially the tube amps; they measure like POS

 I think we also should hate expansive CDP, because most modern cheap DVD player has just as good error correction as the expansive models. And many expansive CDP uses the same opamp as the cheap crap; and the expansive CDP measures no better.

 let's just hate everything hi-end audio related because they are all snake oil. Objectively speaking your ipod is the last thing you need to enjoy music...(the ipod cans measure 20hz - 20khz..its displayed right on the box!)_

 

Well said....


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_why don't people hate expensive headphones?_

 

Your charts show differences of as much as 15dB to 20dB in critical areas of the frequency range. That is most definitely audible, and can mean stark differences in the way those headphones sound.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_why don't people hate expensive headphones? 

 Because you know..the $1000, $2000 or $5000 headphone measures no better than the $100; the only difference is what you hear with no objective data to back that up. 

 I think we should hate expensive amp too. because it doesn't take much to drive 300ohm cans, especially the tube amps; they measure like POS

 I think we also should hate expansive CDP, because most modern cheap DVD player has just as good error correction as the expansive models. And many expansive CDP uses the same opamp as the cheap crap; and the expansive CDP measures no better.

 let's just hate everything hi-end audio related because they are all snake oil. Objectively speaking your ipod is the last thing you need to enjoy music...(the ipod cans measure 20hz - 20khz..its displayed right on the box!)_

 

Is not to hate everything hi-end related, is more IMO to have common sense while buying, as you know we have a lot of overpriced products in the audio market, and not all what is expensive is good. And we have seen some cases, as that one from that DVD that was opened, that was pretty expensive, and resulted to have the same guts as a 59.00 Pioneer DVD player, exactly the same boards....But we all know that cables are among the worst...that is why they are so debated in all circles, how to justify that a pair of cables, and four connectors can cost you the price of a car, what kind of research or material, and marketing can justify that, that is simply insane?
 Of course that doesn't mean that i want to save the world, and most of the companies with such tags do not sell that much neither...but honestly my money will not go that way...while I could get more improvement changing other parts of the system for far less...


----------



## TheMarchingMule

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *JohnFerrier* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_






 ._

 

The hell is that thing dangling between his legs?


----------



## Akathisia

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *TheMarchingMule* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The hell is that thing dangling between his legs?_

 

Upside down rook from a chess board.


----------



## stevenkelby

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_All I ask is respect and courtesy._

 

Can you define that? That's the real point of this whole thread and everything in it.


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *yotacowboy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_SI'd suggest moving away from posts on a bulletin board and setting up your own website as a resource._

 

I have a theory on that. I actually am an educator (on a different subject than audio). And I do have a static website and a blog. But I'm not interested in just teaching. I like to learn from other people as well. I've learned some great things in this forum... perhaps not the particular lesson that some folks want me to learn... but valuable things nonetheless.

 I sincerely believe in the power of the internet for two way communication. I'm not interested in writing books. I'm involved in the exchange of knowledge. There's no better way to do that than through internet forums.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *yotacowboy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Would it please you if there was one single, and final thread on Head-fi that stated, clearly: "If you have no proof of what you hear, you should keep your mouth shut. It's just placebo."[/B]_

 

Absolutely not. No more than I'd like to see a single and final thread that said, "No one is allowed to request proof or discuss placebo." It goes two ways. I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with opposing opinions. Only people who try to squelch them.

 Arguments rise and fall on their merits. Let the chips fall where they may. No one should demand anything of a discussion except intellectual honesty and fairness. Stacking the deck in either direction is wrong. I'm not the one calling for rules about what can and can't be discussed. All I ask is respect and courtesy.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *sean3089* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Julian Hirsh thought all amplifiers sounded the same too!_

 

Actually, he said that all amps that measure the same sound the same. And he was correct in that.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## pabbi1

I just read this entire thread.

 This is an entire microcosm of what I hate about this forum, and feel sad for the folks who spend a lot of time sharing their experiences, and how the continuing dogma of a handful of the 'flat earth society' makes me want to never come back. Same entrenched dogma... same old tired justifications. 

 Maybe with the new forums it will be better - but not again, nor until.

 Thank you Wayne for trying to make sense of this - though, in the end, the 'wire don't matter' crowd have collectively killed this forum. Just leave it for dead - that is their wish, and, they win, NOT through reason, but sheer drone attack repetition. 

 Perhaps the fight should be waged here so they don't follow to the headphone, amp, and DIY forums.

 That this forum needs a drone attack to 'protect' others is the most specious of aguments, offensive by it's very stated purpose, and does nothing but further drive the most vulnerable to be ever more seduced by fallacy.

 Warming up the 'Ignore' list for several new members.


----------



## bigshot

Respect and courtesy doesn't mean agreeing with whatever anyone else says. And it doesn't mean putting IMHO in front of everything you say. It doesn't mean not having passion for a point of view . It has absolutely nothing to do with whether you think cables can make a system sound better or not. And it sure isn't banishing differing opinions to a separate thread or subforum.

 Being a respectful debater involves keeping one's arguments clear and on point. Being intellectually honest and logical in your thought process. Not using semantic tricks to put words in other people's mouths or set up straw men. Making an attempt to understand the other person's point of view, then replying politely, answering their points, avoiding personal attacks, being sincere in your intentions. 

 The proof of respect and courtesy is how you treat your rivals, not how you treat your friends. It's behaving like a gentleman.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## Sovkiller

I think that what made this forum a little different from others is the intolerance of *both fields*. You can resume this behavior in two questions in no particular order, and that is the problem on what this is a vicious circle, none of the two are willing to give up, or at least try to understand the other field:

 1. What relevance has for one who do not hear the differences at all, to read that you hear them, without offering any valid input other than the classic: "I hear them", even while they could be wrong and simply deaf (but an evidence will clear that for them)?

 2. What interest could have the ones who claim to hear the differences in offering the so requested evidence of the existence of them, to those who do not hear them, if they are 100% convinced that they are real, and the others are always wrong?

 Both can be wrong or right, in the eye of the beholder, but none of them leave any margin for the other field...ones constantly asking for the evidence (they know the beleivers do not have), and the others refusing to offer it (as they do not have it, but do not need neither) 

 The skeptics will stop "crapping" (as the believers call when they post) as soon as the believers stop "crapping" with the I know it all attitude while indeed they do not know a ****, otherwise they would be no argument...


----------



## stevenkelby

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Respect and courtesy doesn't mean agreeing with whatever anyone else says. And it doesn't mean putting IMHO in front of everything you say. It doesn't mean not having passion for a point of view . It has absolutely nothing to do with whether you think cables can make a system sound better or not. And it sure isn't banishing differing opinions to a separate thread or subforum.

 Being a respectful debater involves keeping one's arguments clear and on point. Being intellectually honest and logical in your thought process. Not using semantic tricks to put words in other people's mouths or set up straw men. Making an attempt to understand the other person's point of view, then replying politely, answering their points, avoiding personal attacks, being sincere in your intentions. 

 The proof of respect and courtesy is how you treat your rivals, not how you treat your friends. It's behaving like a gentleman.

 See ya
 Steve_

 

Thanks. How would you propose we deal with posts (not people) that are not respectful and courteous?


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I think *Sovkiller *should get rid of his Edition9 because it measures no better than the $50 cans, its made of cheap plastic, and it sounds horrible; you could have saved $950!!! I am sorry you have wasted all those money for nothing._

 

Oh you enriched the post...LOL....

 Well that is not so simple, I wish, and you know very well the answers...OK?


 I will ask you a couple of questions, and I think that we do not need to argue anymore:

 Could you post some measurements with similar details as those, but made in the cable industry by two companies that sell those expensive cables?

 Headroom did measure the headphones, anybody with the right tools can do it, they did not needed 20 millions to do it, it will be good to ask them why not posting any measurement of any cables they sell, or better, any measurement of any headphone with an aftermarket cable, and later stock, just to compare them to see if there is any perceived difference in the graph? That will explain, or at least show, that there is a difference that could explain why they sound different, that could be one approach at least...Who knows!!! 

 Honestly do you really believe that the differences in an electromechanical device, that has a completely different working principle, are of the same magnitude of cables? Can you rate the differences you hear in two different headphones the same magnitude as the ones you hear in two different cables? 

 I do not think that you believe that, man, como'n, OK?

 Electro-mechanical devices also have mechanical components, as the speed of the diaphragm and other mechanical interactions of the mechanical waves inside the cup, for example, the graphs are not representative of these mechanical parameters, that make a difference in for example details, instruments separation, soundstage, etc...the drivers are the last step before our eardrums which also perceive mechanical waves, it is not an electrical process, is purely mechanical...

 Also you know that the distortion you see in the graphs is measured with a tone, you do not listen tones while listening music, the measurements of freq you see in those graphs are achieved as usual (as there is the only way) with tones and maybe pink noise, that is not what you hear, so they are representative of how accurate they reproduce those materials...nothing else...


----------



## pabbi1

Steve, I have read well in excess of a hundred of your (5000) posts which immediately pounce on someone's observation of a cable difference with the 'wire don't matter' mantra. I find that the most disrespectful of all.

 Practice what you preach, my brother. 

 This is just MY observation of your tone toward others, and a ceaseless dogma, on topic or not, save the thought you reserve the right for that to always BE the topic. So, since you demand it always be the topic, you can have a special forum where it is the topic - and a forum can exist where it is NOT (ever) the topic. Fair enough?

 Guess not - the only thing you fear is people not seeing your omniscient posts. Now, I won't, save when someone else quotes it.

 Sorry - I got your response the first time I read it, and have seen nothing new since.


----------



## stevenkelby

As you know those freq. response graphs only give a view of the broad frequency reponse. As accurate as they are, they don't tell you how each can really sounds, only the freq. response. Freq. response is only one factor in the way something sounds. We never see graphs showing that this headphone sounds "fast" or that headphone sounds "detailed" even though they may have the same freq. response.

 I don't know if the same applies to cables, ie, they have the same freq' response, but sound different, but I think it's possible...


----------



## chesebert

To all the objective activists, please explain why HE90 objectively measures no better than KSC55, yet sells for close to 250 times the cost?? And please don't argue they have different measurements or how they actually sound different; the issue is which one is objectively better; you can just forget about your own experience, because according to you all, if it measures worse, it must sound worse; and if it measures the same, it must sound the same. 

 And for those who will dispute measurement schemes, there are standard ways of measuring; and no one in their right mind would use actual 'music' to measure time and frequency domain responses. If you need a refresher on what objective measurement is: the flatter the FQ the better, and the lessor the THD/IMD the better.


----------



## dvw

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_To all the objective activists, please explain why HE90 objectively measures no better than KSC55, yet sells for close to 250 times the cost?? And please don't argue they have different measurements or how they actually sound different; the issue is which one is objectively better; you can just forget about your own experience, because according to you all, if it measures worse, it must sound worse; and if it measures the same, it must sound the same. 

 And for those who will dispute measurement schemes, there are standard ways of measuring; and no one in their right mind would use actual 'music' to measure time and frequency domain responses. If you need a refresher on what objective measurement is: the flatter the FQ the better, and the lessor the THD/IMD the better._

 

I do not wish to enter this debate. However I want to point out that all distortion curve provided by Headroom have the same spike at 350Hz. The curve you provided on distortion is overlapped. If you have the curve independently, you can see it quite clearly. I believe this could be caused by the resonance of the test chamber. As you can see the following spike followed in multiples of 350Hz. 

 As to why one prefers one over another, I am not an expert in this field. However, in my experience as a headphone user, I found that headphone fit, isolation, angle of the driver all play a part. KSC55 and HE90 have two distinctively different configurations. I have no experience with HE90 or KSC55. However, I do enjoy the KSC35 which I believe has the same driver as HSC55.


----------



## AC1

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *pabbi1* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Steve, I have read well in excess of a hundred of your (5000) posts which immediately pounce on someone's observation of a cable difference with the 'wire don't matter' mantra. I find that the most disrespectful of all.

 Practice what you preach, my brother. 

 This is just MY observation of your tone toward others, and a ceaseless dogma, on topic or not, save the thought you reserve the right for that to always BE the topic. So, since you demand it always be the topic, you can have a special forum where it is the topic - and a forum can exist where it is NOT (ever) the topic. Fair enough?

 Guess not - the only thing you fear is people not seeing your omniscient posts. Now, I won't, save when someone else quotes it.

 Sorry - I got your response the first time I read it, and have seen nothing new since._

 

Exactly, you are not alone. 
 He has always had a tone where his observations were somehow superior to others due to his experience as an engineer or his superior intellect. Especially when he first started posting here. To me, it is almost like letting people discuss something just so you can say how wrong they are since they are so stupid. 

 He is probably the single person that has affected me personally that I do not even bother with the cable forum and sharing anything that is related to that forum.


----------



## Uncle Erik

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_To all the objective activists, please explain why HE90 objectively measures no better than KSC55, yet sells for close to 250 times the cost?? And please don't argue they have different measurements or how they actually sound different; the issue is which one is objectively better; you can just forget about your own experience, because according to you all, if it measures worse, it must sound worse; and if it measures the same, it must sound the same. 

 And for those who will dispute measurement schemes, there are standard ways of measuring; and no one in their right mind would use actual 'music' to measure time and frequency domain responses. If you need a refresher on what objective measurement is: the flatter the FQ the better, and the lessor the THD/IMD the better._

 

Measurements and costs are not related. However, the charts you posted do a good job at showing that the HE90 and the KSC55 do, in fact, reproduce sound differently. The lines do not match at all.

 The charts cannot tell you how something sounds nor interpret it. The important point is that they show there is a measurable difference.

 I would like to see charts showing differences between cables. That would show that a difference exists and support your contention that they sound different.

 Aren't you curious how cables work? Don't you wonder what's going on inside the cable, or how the parts interact to make the sound different? Wouldn't you like to know more about them?

 Why leave it at theory and speculation? You have the qualifications and skills to find out. You could probably engineer your own, or provide consulting or design to a company that makes cables.

 You'd prove yourself right, too. Why not?


----------



## UseName

Most people in this thread are acting rather ignorantly. 

 Suppose my opinion is that wire doesn't matter. You ignorant people are saying that it is "thread crapping" if I post that opinion. This suggests to me that you think my opinion is crap. 

 The fact is, there is very little data exists other than a bunch of subjective tests. 

 Please suppose the tables were turned. Let's suppose I start a thread with the subject "wire doesn't matter" and I state that the intention of the thread is the discussion of the many reasons wire makes no difference, the discussioin of personal experience is not allowed because it is subjective and considered "thread crapping". 

 This thread would obviously be biased and offensive to those that do not agree. 

 It's shameful that the mods can't see this bias.


----------



## slwiser

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *UseName* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Most people in this thread are acting rather ignorantly. 

 Suppose my opinion is that wire doesn't matter. You ignorant people are saying that it is "thread crapping" if I post that opinion. This suggests to me that you think my opinion is crap. 

 The fact is, there is very little data exists other than a bunch of subjective tests. _

 

Username, would you please read this and report back on the technical details in this paper concerning wire and the effects physical dimensions have on the audio frequency!

http://www.essex.ac.uk/dces/research/audio_lab/malcolmspubdocs/G3%20HFN%20Essex_Echo_(cables_1985).pdf

 First paragraph:

 "Audiophiles are exited. A special event has occurred that promises to undermine their very foundation and transcend "the event sociological": a minority group now cite conductor and interconnect performance as a limiting factor within an audio system. The masses, however, are still content to congregate with their like-minded friends and make jokes in public about the vision of the converted, content to watch their distortion factor meters confidently null at the termination of any old piece of wire. Believing in Ohm's law, they feel strong in their brotherhood."

 Everyone else, at least read the conclusions.


----------



## mbriant

I think many people are missing the point as to why we intend to separate the combatants in this endless argument. It's to stop the endless arguments.

 The problem is that a small group of non-believers, are continuously derailing discussion threads started by those who do believe. As soon as someone posts a cable review, someone feels it's their duty to tell the world cables don't make a difference. If someone starts a thread asking which of a certain group of cables is best for their system, someone feels it's their duty to tell the world cables don't make a difference. If someone wants to talk about the new cables they just purchased, someone feels it's their duty to tell the world cables don't make a difference. Those who do believe, and would simply like to discuss cables with other like-minded individuals, are continuously having their discussions derailed because someone feels it's their duty to tell the world cables don't make a difference.

 These thread crappers feel they must do this because "they are saving others from wasting their money". While that may be a noble cause, it is still thread crapping when it ruins every cable-related discussion thread that gets started. 

 Unless the discussion is specifically titled "Do cables make a difference?" or something to that effect, these people are essentially thread crapping. If a group of mp3 player owners want to discuss mp3 players, it would be thread crapping for another group of people to continuously barge into their threads to tell them mp3 players are a waste of money because they all sound the same, or they're not really hi-fi.

 If a group of theologians wish to have a discussion about God ( not here of course), it would be thread crapping for another group to continuously derail their discussions by barging in and repeating "There is no God" or "Where's your proof?"

 If a group of SUV owners are having a discussion about SUV's, it would be thread crapping for a group of people to continuously derail their discussions by barging in and repeating "You're wasting fuel" or "You don't need a vehicle that big".... whether they feel they're saving others money or not.

 We have tried and tried asking these people to stop harassing those who wish to discuss cables with other like-minded members, but our pleas have fallen upon deaf ears. We are getting extremely tired of breaking up arguments and watching the same group of people ruin other people's discussions in each and every cable related thread that gets started.

 We do want both sides to be able to present their case if they wish, but we are fed up with a group on a mission continuously ruining discussions and fun for another large group which happens to have a different opinion.


----------



## stevenkelby

It's also about definitions.

 What's a "believer" ? I think it's someone who believes that cables can make a difference.

 What's a "non-believer" ?. Surely that's someone who believes it's impossible for any cable to sound different to any other cable?

 Bluntly, which group is closed minded and has no desire to change their mind?


----------



## UseName

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *slwiser* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Username, would you please read this and report back on the technical details in this paper concerning wire and the effects physical dimensions have on the audio frequency!

http://www.essex.ac.uk/dces/research/audio_lab/malcolmspubdocs/G3%20HFN%20Essex_Echo_(cables_1985).pdf

 First paragraph:

 "Audiophiles are exited. A special event has occurred that promises to undermine their very foundation and transcend "the event sociological": a minority group now cite conductor and interconnect performance as a limiting factor within an audio system. The masses, however, are still content to congregate with their like-minded friends and make jokes in public about the vision of the converted, content to watch their distortion factor meters confidently null at the termination of any old piece of wire. Believing in Ohm's law, they feel strong in their brotherhood."

 Everyone else, at least read the conclusions._

 

This conversation hasn't been about whether or not cables make a difference. I haven't explicitly stated an opinion either way, nor do I intend to at this point. 

 The point I am making is that it appears that one set of opinions are being suppressed. I mean, banning DBT discussions rather than encouraging objective tests hardly seems beneficial to those with a particular viewpoint.


----------



## Vul Kuolun

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *mbriant* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I think many people are missing the point as to why we intend to separate the combatants in this endless argument. It's to stop the endless arguments.

The problem is that a small group of non-believers, are continuously derailing discussion threads started by those who do believe. As soon as someone posts a cable review, someone feels it's their duty to tell the world cables don't make a difference.  If someone starts a thread asking which of a certain group of cables is best for their system, someone feels it's their duty to tell the world cables don't make a difference. If someone wants to talk about the new cables they just purchased, someone feels it's their duty to tell the world cables don't make a difference. Those who do believe, and would simply like to discuss cables with other like-minded individuals, are continuously having their discussions derailed because someone feels it's their duty to tell the world cables don't make a difference.

 These thread crappers feel they must do this because "they are saving others from wasting their money". While that may be a noble cause, it is still thread crapping when it ruins every cable-related discussion thread that gets started. 

 Unless the discussion is specifically titled "Do cables make a difference?" or something to that effect, these people are essentially thread crapping. If a group of mp3 player owners want to discuss mp3 players, it would be thread crapping for another group of people to continuously barge into their threads to tell them mp3 players are a waste of money because they all sound the same, or they're not really hi-fi.

 If a group of theologians wish to have a discussion about God ( not here of course), it would be thread crapping for another group to continuously derail their discussions by barging in and repeating "There is no God" or "Where's your proof?"

 If a group of SUV owners are having a discussion about SUV's, it would be thread crapping for a group of people to continuously derail their discussions by barging in and repeating "You're wasting fuel" or "You don't need a vehicle that big".... whether they feel they're saving others money or not.

 We have tried and tried asking these people to stop harassing those who wish to discuss cables with other like-minded members, but our pleas have fallen upon deaf ears. We are getting extremely tired of breaking up arguments and watching the same group of people ruin other people's discussions in each and every cable related thread that gets started.

 We do want both sides to be able to present their case if they wish, but we are fed up with a group on a mission continuously ruining discussions and fun for another large group which happens to have a different opinion._

 


 Repeating the at least exaggerated accusations doesn't make them more credible. Can you give us a few examples, please? If it is such a big problem, it shouldn't be too much work. 
 Meanwhile, here are a few of the posts from the first pages of the board that have never felt the wreckful touch of any of the evil sceptics talons:

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/al...cables-294983/
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/no...needed-296001/
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/po...tioner-296715/
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/ap...57/index2.html
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/ca...i-mini-300433/
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/do...ssions-300569/
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/ch...55/index2.html
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/re...cables-301979/
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/mo...s-701s-302235/
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/ca...31/index3.html
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/mo...51/index3.html

 Your real problem is obvious:
 With always at least one thread with 30+replies on the cable-theme on page one, with the "believers camp" constantly not looking too good, the forum cannot fulfil it's marketing purpose for your sponsors. Just as it's no longer able to stabilize the positive suggestions responsible for the perceived differences, which understandable pisses off the pro-cables crowd.

 Edit:
 These are the threads that we're really talking about:

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/ma...pgrade-299481/
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/do...cables-294587/
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/su...n-cord-300627/
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/mo...hanger-303099/
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/my...er-3-a-293165/
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/oh...angers-303107/
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/st...d-goes-301935/
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/ti...panies-293247/

 All examples taken from page 1-4.


----------



## yotacowboy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I actually am an educator (on a different subject than audio)... But I'm not interested in just teaching. I like to learn from other people as well. I've learned some great things in this forum... perhaps not the particular lesson that some folks want me to learn... but valuable things nonetheless.

 I sincerely believe in the power of the internet for two way communication. I'm not interested in writing books. I'm involved in the exchange of knowledge. There's no better way to do that than through internet forums.
 See ya
 Steve_

 

 Quote:


  Originally Posted by *AC1* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_He is probably the single person that has affected me personally that I do not even bother with the cable forum and sharing anything that is related to that forum._

 

Here's your lesson, Steve.


 ...and just a semantic observation, but the fact that you think you are involved in the exchange of Knowledge is somewhat telling of your predisposition to provide filtered and biased information as some sort of "whole truth". Steve, knowledge is intrinsically individual: you have the ability to provide me with information - but when, and how that information becomes MY knowledge is entirely up to me.


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Uncle Erik* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Measurements and costs are not related. However, the charts you posted do a good job at showing that the HE90 and the KSC55 do, in fact, reproduce sound differently. The lines do not match at all.

 The charts cannot tell you how something sounds nor interpret it. The important point is that they show there is a measurable difference._

 

Thank you for making my point; like measurements do not sound alike; and objectively better measurements are just that, measurements; and most importantly measurements and cots are not related, i.e. products with the same/similar measurements (therefore objectively have the same performance) need not cost the same.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Uncle Erik* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I would like to see charts showing differences between cables. That would show that a difference exists and support your contention that they sound different.

 Aren't you curious how cables work? Don't you wonder what's going on inside the cable, or how the parts interact to make the sound different? Wouldn't you like to know more about them?

 Why leave it at theory and speculation? You have the qualifications and skills to find out. You could probably engineer your own, or provide consulting or design to a company that makes cables.

 You'd prove yourself right, too. Why not?_

 

no chart of exists because no one really did the research. No one will waste their money and time trying to prove something that has no commercial value (already tiny industry that's shrinking)


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_no chart of exists because no one really did the research. No one will waste their money and time trying to prove something that has no commercial value (already tiny industry that's shrinking)_

 

Considering the prices that some cable companies charge, and the fact that R&D is often cited as one of the justifications for those prices, someone certainly *should* have done the research.


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Considering the prices that some cable companies charge, and the fact that R&D is often cited as one of the justifications for those prices, someone certainly *should* have done the research._

 

2 words: trade secrets


----------



## slwiser

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *UseName* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_This conversation hasn't been about whether or not cables make a difference. I haven't explicitly stated an opinion either way, nor do I intend to at this point. 

 The point I am making is that it appears that one set of opinions are being suppressed. I mean, banning DBT discussions rather than encouraging objective tests hardly seems beneficial to those with a particular viewpoint._

 

So your interest in this thread is totally off topic and you have no interest in the thread subject? The essential issue is do cables make a difference not why people hate. It it is about *hate and those that hate cables then *this subject should be moved to the members forum where almost anything goes that is not about equipment.

 The thread title may support what you noted but the original OP post supports a real question about whether cables do make a difference.

 If you don't want to address this paper here then I invite you to open another thread to discuss it.

 Note that in the post where I pointed this paper out your original note quoted stated that there was little objective data concerning cable differences. This paper addresses the mathematics behind cable design beyond simple circuit design lump mass type techniques. This directly contradicts your initial statement that I was addressing.


----------



## nick_charles

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_2 words: trade secrets_

 

Then perhaps they should conduct carefully (independently) controlled blind listening tests. If they could show that 90% preferrred their cables in a blind test surely that would sell more cables.


----------



## sacd lover

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *mbriant* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I think many people are missing the point as to why we intend to separate the combatants in this endless argument. It's to stop the endless arguments._

 

Amen .... I cant wait for the new forum!


----------



## meat01

Quote:


 Bluntly, which group is closed minded and has no desire to change their mind? 
 

The group who will not allow the cables to be tested in a blind manner to determine if there really are audible differences?


----------



## 883dave

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *meat01* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The group who will not allow the cables to be tested in a blind manner to determine if there really are audible differences?
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

I have done this with my cables, in my system, with my ears and I have come to my own conclusions. 

 No one is stopping you from conducting your own tests.

 Give it a try, then come back and we can share experiences.


----------



## cosmopragma

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Vul Kuolun* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_
 Your real problem is obvious:
 With always at least one thread with 30+replies on the cable-theme on page one, with the "believers camp" constantly not looking too good, the forum cannot fulfil it's marketing purpose for your sponsors. Just as it's no longer able to stabilize the positive suggestions responsible for the perceived differences, which understandable pisses off the pro-cables crowd.
_

 

No, Vul, you are just plain wrong.
 You are accusing head-fi of being basically a shill operation for sponsors like some of the HiFi magazines.
 Head-fi was founded and is maintained by enthusiasts.That's the main reason why it exists, and the business aspects are secondary.
 Head-fi is certainly different from the typical european audio related forum you normally frequent.Those are dominated by objectivists to such an extent that I'm perceived there as being hopelessly subjective whereas here I'm perceived as being member of team sceptic.
 It's certainly a vastly different culture, but it doesn't mean it's a conspiracy.

 No one prevents you from posting unfavorable impressions of for instance Corda amps as long as you keep the criticism civil although Jan Meier is a long standing sponsor.I think this doesn't fit into your conspiracy theory.


----------



## sejarzo

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *pabbi1* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_ ..... This is an entire microcosm of what I hate about this forum, and feel sad for the folks who spend a lot of time sharing their experiences, and how the continuing dogma of a handful of the 'flat earth society' makes me want to never come back. Same entrenched dogma... same old tired justifications. ....._

 

I think the "flat earth" comment is an inept analogy at best.

 First, if one only dealt with his or her own everyday perceptions, one would believe that the world is flat, as far as he or she could tell.

 It takes additional evidence to prove that the human perception of the earth as flat is incorrect, that the "flatness" is a merely an illusion--no matter how convincing one's perception seems to be.

 To an engineer, who is consistently trained to remove as much subjectivity and human perception as possible and substitute objective testing in creating real and economic solutions, the people who claim that "I hear it, therefore it must be true, so I need nothing further" certainly seem to be the flat-earthers.

 What makes "I need no evidence other than my own ears" anything less than another "dogma"?


----------



## slwiser

In reality my take on this issue is that the suppressors (censors) are those that always jump into any thread when someone wants to make a positive statement about how a particular cable sounds better than what they had. They always want to make you feel like you are crazy. It is not that they don't hear the difference but that it can't be there because a wire is a wire! 

 So the real censors are those that oppose the ideal that cables do make a difference in my opinion.

 At least this has been my experience.


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *nick_charles* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Then perhaps they should conduct carefully (independently) controlled blind listening tests. If they could show that 90% preferrred their cables in a blind test surely that would sell more cables._

 

_preferred_ is inherently subjective, either you have an objective test or you don't have one at all, mixing subjective with objective is asking for trouble.


----------



## mark_h

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *UseName* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Most people in this thread are acting rather ignorantly. 

 Suppose my opinion is that wire doesn't matter. You ignorant people are saying that it is "thread crapping" if I post that opinion. This suggests to me that you think my opinion is crap._

 

To quote Cheech, "Wow man, thats some heavy **** man."


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *sacd lover* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Amen .... I cant wait for the new forum! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			



_

 

Thank you mods!!! I can't wait...


----------



## nick_charles

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *slwiser* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_ The essential issue is do cables make a difference not why people hate. ...the original OP post supports a real question about whether cables do make a difference._

 

Not really the intent of the OP, shall we examine the original post.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *MatsudaMan* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I find it really strange that on a forum that is dedicated to "Cables, Power, Tweaks, etc", there are so many people that are really not into tweaks, but rather into hating the tweaks and the people that have so much fun tweaking. For example, all the people out there that swear that there is no difference between speaker cables and interconnects, aren't you on the wrong forum? Hello, just have fun with your radioshack interconnects and leave us alone! This forum is really for people who can hear the difference and get much satisfaction from "Cables, Power, Tweaks, etc". As soon as someone posts a thread about a cable, you get swarms of responses by people who are not into tweaking and just rant about how cables don't do this and don't do that. "Oh, there's no difference between a hanger and such and such cable." "all interconnects sound the same." Uh, I like this forum because it has discussions about which cables are better, which power cords improve, how vibration isolation is good. Am I wrong or should I go somewhere else?_

 

 Quote:


 but rather into hating the tweaks and the people that have so much fun tweaking 
 

There is a difference between thinking that something makes no difference and hating it or those that practice it. The word hate is used to demonise those with a differing opinion as it is stronger than skeptic. It is a kind of primitive tribal behaviour.

  Quote:


 Hello, just have fun with your radioshack interconnects and leave us alone! 
 

An attempt to classify a product range as inferior, based on price I suppose. Personally I use AR as the radioshack cables I bought were really stiff so I gave them away, presumably my AR cables (same price) are just as inferior, I will live with it.

  Quote:


 *This forum is really for people who can hear the difference * 
 

There is a difference but you "haters" just cannot hear it, ooh a bit rude there I think.

  Quote:


 I like this forum because it has discussions about *which cables are better, which power cords improve* 
 

There is unequivocably a difference. 

 The original post doesnt tentatively ask if cables or tweaks make a difference, it implies that they do and argues that those who have that opinion should be left alone unchallenged, i.e not enter into a debate about that premise. It also positions those who disagree as malignant. Now I would contend it is possible to see some hate in the OP ?


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *sejarzo* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_To an engineer, who is consistently trained to remove as much subjectivity and human perception as possible and substitute objective testing in creating real and economic solutions, the people who claim that "I hear it, therefore it must be true, so I need nothing further" certainly seem to be the flat-earthers._

 

you obviously hold your engineering background to a much higher esteem; engineering to me is merely using existing knowledge to make something that works - either design to spec or end result; granted there maybe new 'inventions' needed to accomplish the goal; but 'removing human perception' has never been a moto of the engineering world....


----------



## stevenkelby

Quote:


 stevenkelby - Bluntly, which group is closed minded and has no desire to change their mind? 
 

 Quote:


  Originally Posted by *meat01* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The group who will not allow the cables to be tested in a blind manner to determine if there really are audible differences?
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

Yep that would be 100% true too!

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *nick_charles* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_There is a difference but you "haters" just cannot hear it, ooh a bit rude there I think._

 

Rude is a subjective term, and how do you know that the statement you made is not true?


----------



## slwiser

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *nick_charles* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Not really the intent of the OP, shall we examine the original post.

 There is a difference between thinking that something makes no difference and hating it or those that practice it. The word hate is used to demonise those with a differing opinion as it is stronger than skeptic. It is a kind of primitive tribal behaviour._

 

*Since this thread is about people and opinions and not equipment* the simple solution is to move this over the the General non-equipment forum where it should have been in the first place.

 The Asylum forum has it's Propeller Head sub forum which is much like an area where all that is esoteric is to be discussed. Maybe we also need a Propeller Head sub-forum. We can call it the Aluminum Foil Head forum, Al.Foil-Head forum for short.


----------



## yotacowboy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_none of the two are willing to give up, or at least try to understand the other field... 


 ...The skeptics will stop "crapping" (as the believers call when they post) as soon as the believers stop "crapping" with the I know it all attitude while indeed they do not know a ****, otherwise they would be no argument..._

 

I don't know it all, I can't know it all, and nor have I ever claimed to know it all.

 Further, it is implausible and impossible for ANYONE to know it all.

 So when someone says, "Cables have never, will never and could never make an audible difference to anyone, anywhere, at any time, under any circumstance" - I must ask, how do they know it all? I'm afraid I'm just skeptical. What's worse, is when someone tells me I should just ditch my skepticism and believe someone like James Randi, and that he understands these phenomena better than others. To me, James Randi is just as kooky (read: suspicious) as the Machina Dynamica Teleportation tweak, or the Clever Little Clock...

 What you CAN say, with some validity, is that there is a statistically high probability that someone may not hear a difference... which is NOT any sort of conclusive proof, truth, or 'scientifically accepted' fact. Otherwise, you're providing JUST a subjective evaluation of some (hopefully) objective data - your honest opinion.

 EVEN FURTHER, to equate some objective data value (R, C, N?), or a specific statistical relevance to a population as the sole indicator of a monetary/economic value is flawed as well. In short, the issue is MUCH more complex, and to say that some measurement should 'rule' the value of an audio cable is a reductionist attempt to limit the amount to information which may be relevant.

 As well, to claim that ANYONE and EVERYONE who is involved or even potentially involved with an economic exploit which is not "backed-up" or "proven" by both "sound science" and "statistical relevance" is a snake-oil salesman is equally reductionist, and limits the amount of information which may be relevant to this discussion.


----------



## Kees

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *yotacowboy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Here's your lesson, Steve.


 ...and just a semantic observation, but the fact that you think you are involved in the exchange of Knowledge is somewhat telling of your predisposition to provide filtered and biased information as some sort of "whole truth". Steve, knowledge is intrinsically individual: you have the ability to provide me with information - but when, and how that information becomes MY knowledge is entirely up to me._

 

Yes:
 You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_2 words: trade secrets_

 

To me there are two words as well, but another two words, and I think that you are intellignet enough to not even try to justify that practice, please, those two other words are: *rip off*


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_To me there are two words as well, but another two words, and I think that you are intellignet enough to not even try to justify that practice, please, those two other words are: *rip off*_

 

1 word: subjective


----------



## yotacowboy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_To me there are two words as well, but another two words, and I think that you are intellignet enough to not even try to justify that practice, please, those two other words are: *rip off*_

 

Well then, we appreciate your subjective evaluation of goods in an economic value system!


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *yotacowboy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I don't know it all, I can't know it all, and nor have I ever claimed to know it all.

 Further, it is implausible and impossible for ANYONE to know it all.

 So when someone says, "Cables have never, will never and could never make an audible difference to anyone, anywhere, at any time, under any circumstance" - I must ask, how do they know it all? I'm afraid I'm just skeptical. What's worse, is when someone tells me I should just ditch my skepticism and believe someone like James Randi, and that he understands these phenomena better than others. To me, James Randi is just as kooky (read: suspicious) as the Machina Dynamica Teleportation tweak, or the Clever Little Clock...

 What you CAN say, with some validity, is that there is a statistically high probability that someone may not hear a difference... which is NOT any sort of conclusive proof, truth, or 'scientifically accepted' fact. Otherwise, you're providing JUST a subjective evaluation of some (hopefully) objective data - your honest opinion.

 EVEN FURTHER, to equate some objective data value (R, C, N?), or a specific statistical relevance to a population as the sole indicator of a monetary/economic value is flawed as well. In short, the issue is MUCH more complex, and to say that some measurement should 'rule' the value of an audio cable is a reductionist attempt to limit the amount to information which may be relevant.

 As well, to claim that ANYONE and EVERYONE who is involved or even potentially involved with an economic exploit which is not "backed-up" or "proven" by both "sound science" and "statistical relevance" is a snake-oil salesman is equally reductionist, and limits the amount of information which may be relevant to this discussion._

 

I can substitute a few words there, and will be valid as well, but in a different approach...lets' see:


*I don't know it all, I can't know it all, and nor have I ever claimed to know it all. *

 In your case maybe is not applicable but I could mention other which attitude is really arrogant that do believe they are always right.

*Further, it is implausible and impossible for ANYONE to know it all.*

 We all know that, but they are so full of themselves sometimes that their attitude shows all the opposite...

*So when someone says, "Cables have, will and could make an audible difference to anyone, anywhere, at any time, under any circumstance" - I must ask, how do they know it all? I'm afraid I'm just skeptical. What's worse, is when someone tells me I should just ditch my skepticism and believe someone like James Randi, and that he understands these phenomena better than others. To me, James Randi is just as kooky (read: suspicious) as the Machina Dynamica Teleportation tweak, or the Clever Little Clock...
 What you CAN say, with some validity, is that there is a statistically low probability that someone may hear a difference...which is NOT any sort of conclusive proof, truth, or 'scientifically accepted' fact. Otherwise, you're providing JUST a subjective evaluation of some (hopefully) objective data - your honest opinion.*

 As indeed there should be less people able to hear those differences, as according to their arguments, you need a very good system, trained ears, the cables of course, and a golden ear to hear them, four conditions that must of the times are not together for the majority of us...see how it is a matter of seen the glass half full or half empty...BTW I do not like Randy approach neither, and I never said he knows it all, he is far from that OK?...I just mentioned the deal he made, which they did refused, not sure afraid of what, or why, as they were risking nothing, in comparison to a million bucks.


*EVEN FURTHER, to equate some objective data value (R, C, N?), or a specific statistical relevance to a population as the sole indicator of a monetary/economic value is flawed as well. In short, the issue is MUCH more complex, and to say that some measurement should 'rule' the value of an audio cable is a reductionist attempt to limit the amount to information which may be relevant.*

 The monetary economic value is completely based only in the common sense, if you have it, bingo, but some of them simply lack of it IMO, there is no way in earth that my common sense will let me ditch $7000.00 on a pair of cables, if that will deprive me of the full enjoyment, so be it, will you agree or not? If you don't, please we have no further to discuss...

*As well, to claim that ANYONE and EVERYONE who is involved or even potentially involved with an economic exploit which is not "backed-up" or "proven" by both "sound science" and "statistical relevance" is a snake-oil salesman is equally reductionist, and limits the amount of information which may be relevant to this discussion*

 The information should be provided by them in the first instance, and even if they do, again, do you agree that is logical to ditch such sums of money even if they prove they cables are the best on earth...could you offer me any kind of argument to make me understand the need of such tags...man it is hard for me to get the money OK? I was born poor, and will die poor, but not dumb...


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_1 word: subjective_

 

 Quote:


  Originally Posted by *yotacowboy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Well then, we appreciate your subjective evaluation of goods in an economic value system!_

 

My question to both of you, do you feel that any cable is worth $5000.00? 

 I want a plain and simple yes or no...maybe we are wasting our time discussing?

 And please do not ask me if any amp cost this or that, or if any source cost this or that, or is any heapdhone cost this or that...I just want a simlple yes or no, OK?


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_My question to both of you, do you feel that any cable is worth $5000.00? 

 I want a plain and simple yes or no...maybe we are wasting our time discussing?

 And please do not ask me if any amp cost this or that, or if any source cost this or that, or is any heapdhone cost this or that...I just want a simlple yes or no, OK?_

 

yes. at least 3 reasons.

 1) subjective enjoyment - when someone enjoys $5000 cable more than the $500 one

 2) economical viability - when someone makes $1,000/hr, its much easier and cheaper to just buy the more expensive cable because the $5000 cable is more likely than not better than the $500 cable. (assuming a free market system)

 3) subjective worth - when someone feels $5000 cable is worth $5000

 The same question can be used to justify or not justify any luxury purchases - *[size=large]hi-fi is luxury[/size]*. so I really fail to see the point of the question. maybe the objective activist should threadcrap at every BMW thread, every Mount Blanc thread, every Philip Patek thread, every Harry Winston Thread, and etc...etc..etc...

*lux·u·ry (lŭg'zhə-rē, lŭk'shə-) pronunciation
 n., pl. -ries.
 1. Something inessential but conducive to pleasure and comfort.*


----------



## slwiser

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_My question to both of you, do you feel that any cable is worth $5000.00? _

 

To answer this for myself I would say if I had a series of components that all were in the range of 10 grand a piece then I would want to configure my system with what I would think would be the best sounding cables I could find. I would budget 10 grand for cables in this case. For myself I don't consider 10 grand a component realistic but for a few others it may be. 

 I personally have set a approximate budget limit of 1000$ per component give or take a little. Therefore it would seem reasonable given my view that I would budget up to 1000 for cables. This I have yet to achieve but maybe in the future. 

 I have heard differences myself in cables.


----------



## Vul Kuolun

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *cosmopragma* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_No, Vul, you are just plain wrong.
 You are accusing head-fi of being basically a shill operation for sponsors like some of the HiFi magazines.
 Head-fi was founded and is maintained by enthusiasts.That's the main reason why it exists, and the business aspects are secondary.
 Head-fi is certainly different from the typical european audio related forum you normally frequent.Those are dominated by objectivists to such an extent that I'm perceived there as being hopelessly subjective whereas here I'm perceived as being member of team sceptic.
 It's certainly a vastly different culture, but it doesn't mean it's a conspiracy.

 No one prevents you from posting unfavorable impressions of for instance Corda amps as long as you keep the criticism civil although Jan Meier is a long standing sponsor.I think this doesn't fit into your conspiracy theory._

 


 I don't think or say it's some kind of conspiracy.

 After all, it's about profitability, advertising revenues and maybe most of all, a matter of aportionments of the majorities whithin the head-fi staff, which is, beyond any doubt, pro esoterics.

 The fact that beeing "pro esoteric" pays pure cash, while beeing "sceptic" brings nothing to the register steers the ship in the direction we experience right now, without any need for conspiracy or something like that.

 Just take a look at the list to the right of this post and tell me that the cable question has nothing to do with economics.


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_yes. at least 3 reasons.

 1) subjective enjoyment - when someone enjoys $5000 cable more than the $500 one

 2) economical viability - when someone makes $1,000/hr, its much easier and cheaper to just buy the more expensive cable because the $5000 cable is more likely than not better than the $500 cable. (assuming a free market system)

 3) subjective worth - when someone feels $5000 cable is worth $5000_

 

I least I found one of my answers, we both do not have any further to discuss regarding cables...end of the argument...

 BTW I know a couple of literally millionaires, theo wner fo the company I work for, and a couple more, *millionaires*, and they do not make $1000.00 an hour, less alone to spend $1000.00 on cables....

 FYI $1000.00 an hour is like 2,16 millions a year, how many of you make that amount please?


----------



## yotacowboy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_
 The monetary economic value is completely based only in the common sense, if you have it, bingo, but some of them simply lack of it IMO, there is no way in earth that my common sense will let me ditch $7000.00 on a pair of cables, if that will deprive me of the full enjoyment, so be it, will you agree or not? If you don't, please we have no further to discuss...

 The information should be provided by them in the first instance, and even if they do, again, do you agree that is logical to ditch such sums of money even if they prove they cables are the best on earth...could you offer me any kind of argument to make me understand the need of such tags...man it is hard for me to get the money OK? I was born poor, and will die poor, but not dumb..._

 

"Common sense" is a relativistic understanding of another's opinion... again, it's JUST your subjective evaluation of some finite data/information. Now, whether or not I think it's "worth it" to buy a set of $7,000 cables depends on things that you and I may or may not agree upon, but don't mistake that for "common sense". We may share an opinion - but how we came to that opinion, and whether our opinions are open to change is (again) intrinsically individual.

 So in short, I have no idea if its "common sense" or not to ditch $7000 on a pair of cables. It's your money!

 For me to make any hasty generalization about expensive cables (aside from the fact that they are indeed relatively expensive compared to my income and budget for any audio component), would be silly. I will say, I'd love to hear 'em!


----------



## UseName

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *slwiser* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_So your interest in this thread is totally off topic and you have no interest in the thread subject? The essential issue is do cables make a difference not why people hate. It it is about *hate and those that hate cables then *this subject should be moved to the members forum where almost anything goes that is not about equipment.

 The thread title may support what you noted but the original OP post supports a real question about whether cables do make a difference.

 If you don't want to address this paper here then I invite you to open another thread to discuss it.

 Note that in the post where I pointed this paper out your original note quoted stated that there was little objective data concerning cable differences. This paper addresses the mathematics behind cable design beyond simple circuit design lump mass type techniques. This directly contradicts your initial statement that I was addressing._

 

Frustrating isn't it? This is the same type of thing believers are going through. 

 If someone compares cable A and Cable B, I could argue that the essential issue that should be answered first is whether cables make a difference. So please stop derailing this thread with your thread crapping.


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *slwiser* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_To answer this for myself I would say if I had a series of components that all were in the range of 10 grand a piece then I would want to configure my system with what I would think would be the best sounding cables I could find. I would budget 10 grand for cables in this case. For myself I don't consider 10 grand a component realistic but for a few others it may be. 

 I personally have set a approximate budget limit of 1000$ per component give or take a little. Therefore it would seem reasonable given my view that I would budget up to 1000 for cables. This I have yet to achieve but maybe in the future. 

 I have heard differences myself in cables._

 

My gear is also around $1000.00, some more and some less, per piece and honestly after trying a few cables, I can conclude that I personally do not need to spend $1000.00 in any cable to be 100% happy here....I would rather spend $1000.00 in new music...


----------



## yotacowboy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_do you feel that any cable is worth $5000.00?_

 

I don't know.


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *yotacowboy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_"Common sense" is a relativistic understanding of another's opinion... again, it's JUST your subjective evaluation of some finite data/information. Now, whether or not I think it's "worth it" to buy a set of $7,000 cables depends on things that you and I may or may not agree upon, but don't mistake that for "common sense". We may share an opinion - but how we came to that opinion, and whether our opinions are open to change is (again) intrinsically individual.

 So in short, I have no idea if its "common sense" or not to ditch $7000 on a pair of cables. It's your money!

 For me to make any hasty generalization about expensive cables (aside from the fact that they are indeed relatively expensive compared to my income and budget for any audio component), would be silly. I will say, I'd love to hear 'em!_

 

We all know that comon sense is a relative topic, that is why jail exist, rapists exist, and honest people exist, we all have different views of the same world, based in education, instruction, family moral, etc...

 BTW I did not asked if you believe that a cable is $7000.00 for me, I know that for me is not, but I want to know if for you it is? 


 So resuming is that a yes or a no? Again for you, given the conditions you have right now...


----------



## mbriant

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Vul Kuolun* 
_Repeating the at least exaggerated accusations doesn't make them more credible. Can you give us a few examples, please? If it is such a big problem, it shouldn't be too much work._

 

 In fact, it is a lot of work. Why, because although you are unable to see them, we have spent way too much of our time deleting most of these off-topic, thread-derailing, troll posts so that the discussion could carry on. In some of the more extreme cases, when the thread erupted into a complete flame war and cleaning out all the off topic discussion and arguing became too time consuming or would completely kill the continuity, we've removed the entire thread. So no, you won't find a lot of examples of what I'm talking about because most of the threads I'm talking about have been edited to remove the trolling and off-topic, thread-derailing posts and responses to these posts, but there are plenty of members here who know exactly what I'm talking about and who I'm certain would be willing to verify what I say is the truth.

 But here's one example for you that I've taken the time to un-delete a dozen or so posts, to show exactly what I'm talking about. A member has taken a lot of time and effort to write his opinions of various power cords. A large number of members express interest and wish to further discuss the results and share information, then at post #24, in comes the skeptic, once again starting up the never ending argument and derailing the thread...changing it from a discussion about a review of a selection of cables between an interested, like-minded group of members, to another "cables don't/can't possibly make a difference argument. Again, post #24 and many others after it in this thread were previously deleted, but I've restored them in this instance to give you an example. Sorry, but I'm not about to go through dozens of others just like it, where we've attempted to save the thread and keep the discussion on topic by deleting the off topic, derailing posts, just to prove an obvious point to you.

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/its-done-power-cord-shoot-out-22-power-cords-reviewed-219202/

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Vol Kuolon* 
_
 Your real problem is obvious:
 With always at least one thread with 30+replies on the cable-theme on page one, with the "believers camp" constantly not looking too good, the forum cannot fulfil it's marketing purpose for your sponsors. Just as it's no longer able to stabilize the positive suggestions responsible for the perceived differences, which understandable pisses off the pro-cables crowd.
 These are the threads that we're really talking about:

 Machina dynamica TeleportationTweak long distance audio upgrade
 Don't waste your money on high end digital cables
 "Surprisingly the Monster Cables performance was outclassed by extension cord."
 Monster Cable vs Coat Hanger
 My cat tore up my Virtual Dynamics Power 3...
 Oh for ****'s sake... "Audiophiles can't tell the difference between Monster Cable and coat hangers"
 The Stupidly Ridiculous Cable-of-the-year award goes to....
 Is it time to boycott cable companies?_

 

So that's my real problem is it? I see you subscribe to the conspiracy theory. If that was my obvious problem, and we were simply trying to censor skeptics to protect advertisers .... why is it that all these threads you've listed are even here? Why haven't they been removed or "censored", as some people like to accuse us of doing? How will starting a separate skeptics forum, specifically meant to acomodate these exact type of threads, solve this problem ... as you accuse? Where's the censorship there?

 I very much resent your insinuation that my previous post was a lie to cover some ulterior motive, when in fact, it was the complete and honest truth. WE WANT TO ALLOW BOTH SIDES TO BE ABLE TO ENJOY DISCUSSIONS THAT INTEREST THEM, AND FOR BOTH SIDES TO BE ABLE TO EXPRESS THEMSELVES AND THEIR OPINIONS/BELIEFS ON THIS CONTENTIOUS ISSUE. AT THE SAME TIME, WE DON'T WANT ONE GROUP SPOILING ANOTHER GROUP'S DISCUSSION AND ENJOYMENT OF THEIR HOBBY BY REGULARLY INTERUPTING THEIR DISCUSSIONS BY CHIMING IN LIKE A BROKEN RECORD TO TELL THEM WHAT THEY BELIEVE IS WRONG. 

 WHAT CAN BE MORE OPEN OR FAIR THAN THAT?. SKEPTICS ARE NOT BEING CENSORED, THEY WILL BE PREVENTED FROM TROLLING AND RUINING NON-SKEPTIC'S DISCUSSIONS ... AS THEY HAVE BEEN DOING REGULARLY FOR SOME TIME NOW. The "no DBT" rule was originally created in an attempt to prevent this very same thing, but we've realized that that was unfair to the skeptic's side. So we intend to make it fair. BUT THE FACT IS, YOU AND OTHERS WHO SUBSCRIBE TO SUBJECTIVE THINKING, WILL STILL BE ABLE TO MAKE YOUR POINT. AGAIN, WHERE'S THE CENSORSHIP THERE?

 I hope this clarifies things for you


----------



## Arainach

Caps-Lock key broken much?

 I always find it amusing that it's the skeptics that are regarded as trolling when, if the difference is so huge and obvious as people claim, it'd be a simple matter to just do a _single_ double-blind test to scientific standards and shut up all the skeptics. Yet everyone who's tried to do it has failed.


----------



## yotacowboy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Arainach* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Yet everyone who's tried to do it has failed._

 

Everyone?


----------



## JohnFerrier

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Arainach* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Caps-Lock key broken much?

 I always find it amusing that it's the skeptics that are regarded as trolling when, if the difference is so huge and obvious as people claim, it'd be a simple matter to just do a single double-blind test to scientific standards and shut up all the skeptics. Yet everyone who's tried to do it has failed._

 

And if cables made a real audible difference, there would be something else to discuss.

 .


----------



## cosmopragma

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *yotacowboy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Everyone?_

 

Yes, seems so, but there's always a last resort.
 Just question the validity of DBTs and drive the sceptics crazy this way.


----------



## Arainach

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *yotacowboy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Everyone?_

 

Everyone. A series of truly double-blind, repeated tests, on multiple subjects, etc. has always failed. If it _hadn't_, someone would have claimed the million bucks by now.


----------



## Sovkiller

I suggest also to divide the forums into tube lovers vs. solid state lovers, and another vinyl lovers vs. CD lovers...we all have seen very good and out of hands discussions in those two topics as well, this way we will have even less problems.....
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 And in a few years on the road we could divide them further, for example the tubes in OTL vs. transformer coupled, the SS into OPamps vs. discrete, the LP lovers by speed (33-1/3rpm, 45rpm, 78rpm) and the CD lovers by format (SACD, DVD-A, HDCD, etc...) and in ten years we will have a good head-fi monologue, bravo that is the spirit!!! In which you can say the stupid thing you want, and nobody will argue with you, as you will ahve your own place to state your opinion as well...Of course we will not need moderators then...


----------



## yotacowboy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *cosmopragma* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Yes, seems so, but there's always a last resort.
 Just question the validity of DBTs and drive the sceptics crazy this way.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

No, actually i question the statement that everyone has failed a single-blind.

 Show me proof! Show me data!


----------



## yotacowboy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Arainach* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Everyone. A series of truly double-blind, repeated tests, on multiple subjects, etc. has always failed. If it hadn't, someone would have claimed the million bucks by now._

 

Show me the conclusive proof!

 I want to see objective, qualified and rigorously collected data. Seriously. Post it.


----------



## mbriant

Quote:


 it'd be a simple matter to just do a single double-blind test to scientific standards and shut up all the skeptics. 
 

As someone who has paid the National Research Council in Ottawa to do hundreds of DBTs on loudspeakers, I know for a fact that it's not "simple" to do it properly.

 Have you yourself ever organized and done any real DBTs? It's easy for people to flippantly tell others to "do a DBT", yet these same people are most often unwilling to do it themselves, and in most cases, they're unwilling to recreate the listening environment (hardware and software) the non-skeptic they're challenging, used to come to his conclusions.

 And the trolling accusations are not about who's opinion is right or who's is wrong, what makes the most logical or scientific sense, or how easy it would be to prove by doing a DBT .... it's about common courtesy and not ruining other people's enjoyment by trolling and thread crapping, because you happen to be on a mission.


----------



## Vul Kuolun

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *mbriant* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_In fact, it is a lot of work. Why, because although you are unable to see them, we have deleted many of these off-topic, thread-derailing, troll posts so that the discussion could carry on. In some of the more extreme cases, when the thread erupted into a complete flame war, we've removed the thread.

 But here's one example for you that I've taken the time to un-delete a dozen or so posts, to show exactly what I'm talking about. A member has taken a lot of time and effort to write his opinions of various power cords. A large number of members express interest and wish to further discuss the results and share information, then at post #24, in comes the non-believer, once again starting up the never ending argument and derailing the thread...changing it from a discussion about a selection of cables to a "cables don't/can't possibly make a difference argument. Again, post #24 and many others in this thread were previously deleted, but I've restored them in this instance to give you an example. Sorry, but I'm not about to go through dozens of others just like it, where we've attempted to save the thread and keep the discussion on topic by deleting the off topic, derailing posts, just to prove an obvious point to you.

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/its-done-power-cord-shoot-out-22-power-cords-reviewed-219202/



 So that's my real problem is it? I see you subscribe to the conspiracy theory. If that was my problem, and we were simply trying to censor skeptics to protect advertisers .... why is it that these threads you've listed are even here? Why haven't they been removed or "censored", as some people like to accuse us of doing? How will starting a separate skeptics forum, specifically meant to acomodate these exact type of threads, solve my problem? Where's the censorship there?

 I very much resent your insinuation that my previous post was a lie, when it was the complete and honest truth. WE WANT TO ALLOW BOTH SIDES TO BE ABLE TO ENJOY DISCUSSIONS THAT INTEREST THEM, AND FOR BOTH SIDES TO BE ABLE TO EXPRESS THEMSELVES AND THEIR OPINIONS/BELIEFS ON THIS CONTENTIOUS ISSUE. AT THE SAME TIME, WE DON'T WANT ONE GROUP SPOILING ANOTHER GROUP'S DISCUSSION AND ENJOYMENT OF THEIR HOBBY BY REGULARLY INTERUPTING THEIR DISCUSSIONS BY CHIMING IN LIKE A BROKEN RECORD TO TELL THEM WHAT THEY BELIEVE IS WRONG. 

 WHAT CAN BE MORE OPEN OR FAIR THAN THAT?. SKEPTICS ARE NOT BEING CENSORED, THEY'RE BEING PREVENTED FROM TROLLING AND RUINING NON-SKEPTIC'S DISCUSSIONS ... AS THEY HAVE BEEN DOING REGULARLY FOR SOME TIME NOW. The "no DBT" rule was originally created in an attempt to prevent this very same thing, but we've realized that that was unfair to the skeptic's side. So we intend to make it fair.

 I hope this clarifies things for you_

 


 Thanks for your efforts. I do in fact see your point, and i didn't say there are no threads where a sceptic is pulling the topic from "subjective comutation" to basic discussion.

 But i'm sorry, i completely fail to see something like this:

  Quote:


 continuously 

 derailing 
 

 Quote:


 As soon as someone posts a cable review 
 

 Quote:


 it ruins every cable-related discussion thread that gets started 
 

 Quote:


 each and every cable related thread that gets started 
 

 Quote:


 continuously ruining discussions 
 

That is simply exaggeragated to a almost ridicuosly extend.

 For the "conspircy theory", please read my answer to cosmopragma. I'm not accusing you of beeing the the devil, just to be biased.

 As for your intention to keep the discussion open, the "no DBT"-rule just has been costing you a good amount of credibility for every sceptical beeing interested in the discussion. I don't think you should be too amazed when people question your decisions and consider maybe financial or other interests beeing involved in your strategies.

 For the "why would we set up a sceptics forum"-argument:

 As long as you and your staff are encouraging members for talking about "kiddy pool" and other derogatory terms, you don't have to ask yourself why people expect to get excluded with the purpose of beiing not heard anymore, when apparently all you plan to do is set up a exposed platform for discussing the themes that do piss you off so much.


----------



## Sovkiller

*We all know that Headfi has a lot of talented people, manufacturers, a lot of members with excelent gear, and good cables, money is not an object, and the most important thing, a lot fo claimed golden ears...OTOH we at least make a yearly event in which we all get together, right?

 Well I propose instead fo a conference, or a DIY workshop, why not implementing a completelly scientific, and statistical based, valid DBT using all the help we can from all those fellows headfiers, and run for a God darn time a well implemented and completelly accepted by both fields, Double Blind Test ourselves, this will set us ahead of the world, and ahead of the other forums...AND WILL END THE DISCUSSIONS HERE OR THERE FOR LIFE, IT WILL BE SIMPLER, MORE EFFECTIVE AND WILL OFFER A RESULT THAT BOTH FIELDS WILL ACCEPT...*


----------



## mbriant

Quote:


 As long as you and your staff are encouraging members for talking about "kiddy pool" and other derogatory terms, you don't have to ask yourself why people expect to get excluded with the purpose of beiing not heard anymore, when apparently all you plan to do is set up a exposed platform for discussing the themes that do piss you off so much. 
 

 I'm afraid I don't understand what you're trying to say here.

 Sovkiller: Go for it! Organize it! The ironic thing about all this, is that I'm a skeptic myself. But I'm also able to accept the fact that there are thousands of intelligent audiophiles who disagree with my opinions, and I feel very strongly that they deserve to have discussion amongst themselves about areas of the hobby that interest them without having their threads spoiled by an opposing group who follow them around and challenge their beliefs on a regular basis. Yes Vol, a regular basis ... yes, there are times when not every thread has been trolled, but there have been periods of time when practically every cable thread has been trolled .... usually by the same handful of people. Besides, trolling, thread crapping, off-topic derailing, is wrong ... even once. And when the same small group of individuals does it over and over again, I call that continuously.

 There is no doubt that the cable skeptic/non-skeptic debate has been going on for years. We have seen many, many perfectly good threads turn into useless flame wars whenever the two sides bump heads. Until Sovkiller proves the skeptics 100% correct by setting up a scienfically sound DB Testing facility that every audiophile who hears differences in cables, in the world, has the opportunity to use, these arguments, flame wars, ruined threads, and resulting bad feelings will continue unless something is done. So we're trying to do something and we're trying to be fair. Sovkiller, go ahead and make sarcastic comments about it, but the fact is we don't have this same problem to anywhere near the same degree with tubes vs. solid state or vinyl vs. cd. If we did, we'd probably take your advice and attempt to keep the warring factions separated as well. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 All I know is that we try to keep the place friendly, and it's not friendly when one group keeps ruining another group's fun by causing the same argument over and over again....however much they feel they are right or their cause is noble. For those who don't like "friendly" or "orderly" or who feel this makes things too artificial or too censored, I"m sorry, but that's the way it is. There are plenty of other sites where bullies rule, and if anyone enjoys giving and taking flames, insults, and foul language, and letting the mob drive the mild and meek or simply the refined and polite away, then I suggest this isn't the place for them and that they spend their time there.


----------



## MaZa

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *yotacowboy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Show me the conclusive proof!

 I want to see objective, qualified and rigorously collected data. Seriously. Post it._

 



 From the observers POV, this cable fight has been going on since the very day one hifi-cables appeared on market. Meaning many many years. From what I have gathered, ALL reported DBTs have been negative. Why? I have yet to see a single DBT where person has managed to tell the difference. Why is this? So skeptics have their proof, have had for many years, but I *want* to see proofs from believers side also that would crush the skeptics proof of cables or make it invalid. All these tens of years, I presume some DBT test would have gone 'right' and differences have been noticeable, but why not? Or have I been missing something badly? Again, this is from observers POV, who is leaning to skeptics side more and more each day...


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *MaZa* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_From the observers POV, this cable fight has been going on since the very day one hifi-cables appeared on market. Meaning many many years. From what I have gathered, ALL reported DBTs have been negative. Why? I have yet to see a single DBT where person has managed to tell the difference. Why is this? So skeptics have their proof, have had for many years, but I *want* to see proofs from believers side also that would crush the skeptics proof of cables or make it invalid. All these tens of years, I presume some DBT test would have gone 'right' and differences have been noticeable, but why not? Or have I been missing something badly? Again, this is from observers POV, who is leaning to skeptics side more and more each day..._

 


[size=xx-large]GOOD STUFF!!![/size]


 And on top the skeptics are the worng ones, that need to be "secluded" into a new subforum, the logic goes out of the window here!!!!!


----------



## Vul Kuolun

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *mbriant* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I'm afraid I don't understand what you're trying to say here._

 

I'm talking about markl talking about the sceptics beeing a bunch od unexperienced youngsters, whose motivation for participating here is their wish to justify their inadequate finacial capabilites, and Wmcmanus applauding to it.


----------



## yotacowboy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *MaZa* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_From the observers POV, this cable fight has been going on since the very day one hifi-cables appeared on market. Meaning many many years. From what I have gathered, ALL reported DBTs have been negative. Why? I have yet to see a single DBT where person has managed to tell the difference. Why is this? So skeptics have their proof, have had for many years, but I *want* to see proofs from believers side also that would crush the skeptics proof of cables or make it invalid. All these tens of years, I presume some DBT test would have gone 'right' and differences have been noticeable, but why not? Or have I been missing something badly? Again, this is from observers POV, who is leaning to skeptics side more and more each day..._

 

Ok. one more time.

 It's a simple question:

 Where is the data? show me!

 If you've seen or read something that shows, conclusively, that every single-blind experiment has failed to show any difference in cables, I'd like to see it. show me the data. I'm starting to lose track of how many times I've personally asked for this information here... call me Johnny-5, cause I need input.

 objective data. that's all I'm asking for.


----------



## MaZa

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *yotacowboy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Ok. one more time.

 It's a simple question:

 Where is the data? show me!

 If you've seen or read something that shows, conclusively, that every single-blind experiment has failed to show any difference in cables, I'd like to see it. show me the data. I'm starting to lose track of how many times I've personally asked for this information here... call me Johnny-5, cause I need input.

 objective data. that's all I'm asking for._

 



 I know internet isnt 100% reliable, far from it. But where was the website again where this very subject had been handled. Telling when people started to turn their attention to cables, both hifi-companies and hifists. The article was very long, handling tests from several hifi-magazines etc... I lost the bookmark after I built my new computer couple of weeks ago, but I guess some of you skeptics still have it?

 I give you that it isnt THE proof, (quite few of the stuff in internet is) but still a damn good one in comparison to the believers side which I have seen NONE. Untill now perhaps? I ask YOU the same question, do you have a proof that there is NOTHING in the claims skeptics have been saying and prooving tens of years? Have they been mumbling nothing but empty words all this time?

 I give a big kudos to slwiser so far, he atleast tried something. He PMd me the theory how different materials might affect the travel of different frequencies, the article which he soon posted here too, but was bit brushed aside by skeptics from what I have noticed (tsk tsk...). However, mathematic stuff like that is total hebrew for me, and I sort of hoped someone with bigger knowledge of physics or electricity would have studied it and say if there is any truth in it, or if the difference is in 0.00000000000001 margin. (read, almost unmeasurable and definetly unheardable) HE did try to give me some proof, although it was undecipherable for me and I thank you for trying objectively to defend believers side, but translation and valuation is in order.


----------



## mbriant

Quote:


 As long as you and your staff are encouraging members for talking about "kiddy pool" and other derogatory terms, you don't have to ask yourself why people expect to get excluded with the purpose of beiing not heard anymore, when apparently all you plan to do is set up a exposed platform for discussing the themes that do piss you off so much. 
 

 I don't recall encouraging members for talking about "kiddy pool". Who's exaggerating now? And thanks again for letting me know what I'm trying to do....."apparently, all you plan to do is set up an exposed platform for discussing the themes that do piss you off so much" I'm still a little unclear with this accusation/assumption of yours, but I thought I'd made myself fairly clear as to why we intend to set up a separate forum for skeptics. It has absolutely nothing to do with a theme that "pisses me off so much" and everything to do with a small group of people on a mission, regularly derailing and disrupting other members discussions by taking their friendly, hobbyist discussion off topic and turning it into the same repetitive, never-ending argument. How many times do I have to repeat this?

  Quote:


 Quote:
 Originally Posted by mbriant 
 I'm afraid I don't understand what you're trying to say here.

 I'm talking about markl talking about the sceptics beeing a bunch od unexperienced youngsters, whose motivation for participating here is their wish to justify their inadequate finacial capabilites, and Wmcmanus applauding to it. 
 

 That sounds like the opinions of two out of 66,000 members....posted in one thread out of hundreds of thousands of threads. I'd hazard a guess that whatever was said, was said out of the frustration one gets when they are fed up with being called (or insinuated) that they are delusional or liars or foolish for the umteenth time. It's been said again and again ( again, because it's true), every moderator here was and is a member first. They spend hours of their time, as volunteers, helping to keep order. They were chosen as moderators because they've shown they care about the hobby and the site, and have exhibited a certain level of rationality. They are not prohibited from participating in discussions or enjoying themselves as members by being a moderator. They too get angry or frustrated at times, for the same reasons any regular member might get angry or frustrated. Sometimes they take a side on an issue and then the issue turns ugly. When that happens, we ask, if possible, that the moderator step back and not perform mod functions in that thread. Sometimes it doesn't work out that way, but not very often. Pulling out one instance of a moderator agreeing with a side, shouldn't be held up as an example of censorship or intimidation (if that's what you're getting at) Did he ban or threaten to ban anyone for disagreeing with him?

 If you look through the threads, I'm certain you'll also find more than one poster accusing non-skeptics of being delusional or sheep trying to justify spending large amounts of money on cables. That's insulting as well. Just think, once we put an end to this constant head-butting, in an argument that never ends, we won't have to listen to opinions we disagree with or be insulted .... unless we want to by intentionally reading the appropriate forum.


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *MaZa* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I know internet isnt 100% reliable, far from it. But where was the website again where this very subject had been handled. Telling when people started to turn their attention to cables, both hifi-companies and hifists. The article was very long, handling tests from several hifi-magazines etc... I lost the bookmark after I built my new computer couple of weeks ago, but I guess some of you skeptics still have it?

 I give you that it isnt THE proof, (quite few of the stuff in internet is) but still a damn good one in comparison to the believers side which I have seen NONE. Untill now perhaps? I ask YOU the same question, do you have a proof that there is NOTHING in the claims skeptics have been saying and prooving tens of years? Have they been mumbling nothing but empty words all this time?

 I give a big kudos to slwiser so far, he atleast tried something. He PMd me the theory how different materials might affect the travel of different frequencies, the article which he soon posted here too, but was bit brushed aside by skeptics from what I have noticed (tsk tsk...). However, mathematic stuff like that is total hebrew for me, and I sort of hoped someone with bigger knowledge of physics or electricity would have studied it and say if there is any truth in it, or if the difference is in 0.00000000000001 margin. (read, almost unmeasurable and definetly unheardable) HE did try to give me some proof, although it was undecipherable for me (translation and judgement please!)_

 

Again we all know that the difference in cables exist, they are physically different, the parameters sometimes measure different, the materials used are different, and the travel of different freq are different, but the problem is that nobody post an study on why one is better than other, as they all limit the info. The question we always asked for is, to what extend those differences are audible or not, and by whom, maybe a bat can hear them, the problem is not if they are there or not, we know that 0.001ohms and 0.1ohms are 100 times apart, now place a resistor on .001 and another of 0.1 ohms inside a cable, and tell where is which....

 Most of the differences they claim, if any, are in freqs far above the audible spectrum...


----------



## mbriant

And the never-ending argument continues .....


----------



## yotacowboy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *MaZa* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I ask YOU the same question, do you have a proof that there is NOTHING in the claims skeptics have been saying and prooving tens of years? Have they been mumbling nothing but empty words all this time?_

 

I don't have proof either way...

 ...and actually, I'm quite happy with that predicament. without getting too philosophical, I quite enjoy the idea that there is no universal truth in this matter. What I don't enjoy is when other people make certain universal claims, and blame their beliefs on a perversion of empirical science or a perversion of subjective beauty.


----------



## Vul Kuolun

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *mbriant* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_That sounds the opinions of two out of 66,000 members....posted in one thread out of hundreds of thousands of threads. it's been said again and again ( again, because it's true), every moderator here was and is a member first. They spend hours of their time, as volunteers, helping to keep order. They were chosen as moderators because they've shown they care about the hobby and the site, and have exhibited a certain level of rationality. They are not prohibited to participate in discussions or enjoy themselves as members by being a moderator. They too get angry or frustrated at times, for the same reasons any regular member might get angry or frustrated. Sometimes they take a side on an issue and then the issue turns ugly. If you look through the threads, I'm certain you'll also find more than one poster accusing non-skeptics of being delusional or sheep trying to justify spending money on cables. Just think, once we put an end to this constant head-butting, in an argument that never ends, we won't have to listen to opinions we disagree with .... unless we want to by intentionally reading the appropriate forum._

 

It's not about what two members say. There are other, far more offending postings to be read. That's not the problem, i can take a joke or to.
 It's about the positions your moderators constantly take, and a moderator has a exposed role in these discussions. People will and do watch closely what a moderator says, concluding official positions from their comments. Especially, if the mods are so homogeneously pro subjectivist as here.

 You tell me you're unbiased and like to create fair conditions for all sides.
 I tell you why i have some doubts.

 But at last, you're chief, it's your board. We'll see. I can certainly live with whatever route you take.


----------



## MaZa

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *mbriant* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_And the never-ending argument continues ..... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

Perhaps, but im getting better big-picture all the time, so a bit more patience please. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	





  Quote:


 Again we all know that the differecnes in cables exist, they are physically different, the parameters sometimes measure different, the materials used are different, and the travel of different freq are different, but the problem is that nobody post an study on why one is better than other, as they all limit the info. The question we always asked for is, to what extend those differences are audible or not, and by whom, maybe a bat can hear them, the problem is not if they are there or not, we know that 0.001ohms and 0.1ohms are 100 times appart, now place a resistor on .001 and another of 0.1 ohms inside a cable, and tell where is which....

 Most of the differences they claim, if any, are in freqs far above the audible spectrum... 
 


 So, the cables do alter the signal. Some frequencies are slowed down by cable material. But if they might be audible in theory, then why spend money on uber-expensive cables? Why not shorten them as short as possible, (or go as far as no cable at all as I proposed earlier) so they have least amount of time to be hindered? So copper has different characteristics in different frequencies and silver has different characteristics in other frequencies than copper. But copper is a copper and silver is a silver then, a label nor pricetag difference on cable doesnt mean a rats arse, the same characteristic is shared by all cables of same material of same purity? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	





  Quote:


 I don't have proof either way...

 ...and actually, I'm quite happy with that predicament. without getting too philosophical, I quite enjoy the idea that there is no universal truth in this matter. What I don't enjoy is when other people make certain universal claims, and blame their beliefs on a perversion of empirical science or a perversion of subjective beauty. 
 

Perhaps there is? Thats why im asking questions here and trying to learn as much as possible to find which side holds more water, which side is more likeably to be true. Well see.


----------



## slwiser

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_....... but the problem is that nobody post an study on why one is better than other, as they all limit the info............_

 

Yes, I did and was promptly told that it was tread crapping. So don't ask for technical information when none is desired or truly wanted.


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *slwiser* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Yes, I did and was promptly told that it was tread crapping. So don't ask for technical information when none is desired or truly wanted._

 

Did I told you that is was thread crapping? I'm getting senile then...I do want it, that is exactly all I was looking for, the funny thing is that if this info exists, why it was never used before and was ignored for so long, is it good enough, I mean does it really answers what we are trying to clear?

 Sorry if I was not clear enough, I was referring to the cable manufacturers while I said nobody, the ones who charge the big bucks, they at least should provide some kind of elements instead fo relying of third party homework for that...anyway if you have it, just post it, that will at least be an starting point....


----------



## Lazarus Short

As some of you may already know, I am a member of the "wire-is-wire" camp, but why am I called a "cable hater"? I don't hate cable, I have a stash of them, from cheap to expensive to home-made in a fairly large carrying case. I even sold a very sexy optical Bluetooth mouse, because it was wireless. When I set up my audio gear, I try to use the "better" cables before the cheapies. 

 There is ONE person on Head-Fi who is qualified to end this debate: Billinkansas. I don't mean to single him out, but he made a device which can instantly switch from one source or wire to another. He had me A/B a vintage Fisher tube receiver vs a newer SS receiver. I listened, switched back & forth, and soon noted that one had a hotter top end. I thought, Oh, the one with the rolled-off highs must the one with tubes! I guessed - wrong!! This thread has piqued my interest, and when Bill and I meet again, I am going to want to try out his switcher on my cables. I hope to take notes and report back in this forum...

 BTW, did anyone else note how early the OP dropped out of the thread??
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Laz


----------



## mbriant

slwiser: Thank you for quickly editing and removing the last part of your sentence which originally read "... when none is desired or truly wanted by the head in the sand crowd". That must mean that at least someone is starting to realize the sort of flippant, non-productive insults that get thrown about during these sort of discussions.

 I'd be interested in seeing the thread ( and the OP's original topic heading) where your info was called thread crapping.


----------



## Uncle Erik

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Lazarus Short* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_As some of you may already know, I am a member of the "wire-is-wire" camp, but why am I called a "cable hater"? I don't hate cable, I have a stash of them, from cheap to expensive to home-made in a fairly large carrying case. I even sold a very sexy optical Bluetooth mouse, because it was wireless. When I set up my audio gear, I try to use the "better" cables before the cheapies. 

 There is ONE person on Head-Fi who is qualified to end this debate: Billinkansas. I don't mean to single him out, but he made a device which can instantly switch from one source or wire to another. He had me A/B a vintage Fisher tube receiver vs a newer SS receiver. I listened, switched back & forth, and soon noted that one had a hotter top end. I thought, Oh, the one with the rolled-off highs must the one with tubes! I guessed - wrong!! This thread has piqued my interest, and when Bill and I meet again, I am going to want to try out his switcher on my cables. I hope to take notes and report back in this forum._

 

I agree with you on the "hating" part. I've got the special Grado wire on my HP-2s and had my tonearm rewired with Cardas. I don't think the wire adds or detracts from the headphones, and the tonearm sounds about the same. The reason I had it rewired was so it would have a proper ground - I didn't like the way Rega runs ground on the left channel. But the Cardas works fine. Again, I just don't notice a difference. It's not hate. Cardas had the right wire for the job and I've had zero problems with it. I am happy with it and think well of the product, but don't hear the wire making a sonic difference.

 I think the testing device sounds like a great idea. I'd love to see the results from a test.


----------



## IPodPJ

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *MaZa* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_So, the cables do alter the signal. Some frequencies are slowed down by cable material. But if they might be audible in theory, then why spend money on uber-expensive cables? Why not shorten them as short as possible, (or go as far as no cable at all as I proposed earlier) so they have least amount of time to be hindered? So copper has different characteristics in different frequencies and silver has different characteristics in other frequencies than copper. But copper is a copper and silver is a silver then, a label nor pricetag difference on cable doesnt mean a rats arse, the same characteristic is shared by all cables of same material of same purity? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Perhaps there is? Thats why im asking questions here and trying to learn as much as possible to find which side holds more water, which side is more likeably to be true. Well see._

 

I have always agreed with this standpoint. The ideal solution would be to combine all your equipment into a one-box solution.

 Think of cables and power cords as an audiophile's method of tone control. Equalizers are taboo because they distort the sound. Mid-tier and top-tier equipment have no bass/treble/equalizer controls.

 Let's say you own and love a certain CD player but just wish it had the tiniest bit more warmth. You don't want to shop all over for a different CD player because you love everything about it from its sonics to its wealth of features. You can contour the sound more to your liking by using different cables and power cords (just as your CD player contours the sound by using different buffers and output stages). The benefits aren't only in the realm of tone control, but offer more detail as well by using higher gauge conductors and more layers of shielding to block out EMI.

 When quantum physicists say they don't exactly understand the behavior of electrons, I strongly doubt certain people that frequent this forum do either. We know cables will yield different sonic traits in one system than another. We just don't really know why. But the more that certain cable companies spew out loads of marketing-driven psychobabble, the more it taints the opinions of those who, A) are looking for a way to enhance their audio system, and B) already know their products can stand on their own merit.


----------



## slwiser

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Sorry if I was not clear enough, I was referring to the cable manufacturers while I said nobody, the ones who charge the big bucks, they at least should provide some kind of elements instead fo relying of third party homework for that...anyway if you have it, just post it, that will at least be an starting point...._

 

No you did not say that my posting the link to the paper was tread crapping but noUseName did. 

 Just check in post 347 on page 18 to get to the link.


----------



## slwiser

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *UseName* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Frustrating isn't it? This is the same type of thing believers are going through. 

 If someone compares cable A and Cable B, I could argue that the essential issue that should be answered first is whether cables make a difference. *So please stop derailing this thread with your thread crapping*._

 

Highlighting is mine.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *mbriant* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_slwiser: Thank you for quickly editing and removing the last part of your sentence which originally read "... when none is desired or truly wanted by the head in the sand crowd". That must mean that at least someone is starting to realize the sort of flippant, non-productive insults that get thrown about during these sort of discussions.

 I'd be interested in seeing the thread ( and the OP's original topic heading) where your info was called thread crapping._

 

Here you go with the post that I was referring too.


----------



## MaZa

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *slwiser* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_No you did not say that my posting the link to the paper was tread crapping but noUseName did. 

 Just check in post 347 on page 18 to get to the link._

 


 Here it is again, for easier access.
http://www.essex.ac.uk/ese/research/...es_1985%29.pdf


----------



## Wmcmanus

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Vul Kuolun* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I'm talking about markl talking about the sceptics beeing a bunch od unexperienced youngsters, whose motivation for participating here is their wish to justify their inadequate finacial capabilites, and Wmcmanus applauding to it._

 

Must not be in this thread. I've replied to markl's comments twice in this thread: post #60 and post #64, neither of which had to do with a kiddy pool. My comments in both of these posts were specifically related to the exchange between markl's and Sovkiller. I was basically saying that I agreed with markl. If his reviews of headphones and amps and so forth are credible, then why would his reviews of cables not be credible? That was the context.


----------



## dazzer1975

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* 
_Must not be in this thread._

 


 It was on page 1 of this thread whereMarkl refers to sceptics as young, inexperienced and financially inadequate.

 My responses didn't help the situation, but being a cable believer, as I have had to state for the umpteenth time now and yet still drew comments attacking me for being a sceptic???? I didn't think calling all sceptics young and poor would really provide the best foundation for rational debate.

 Look how the thread has turned out and look at the ones who are being accused most vehemently of engaging in personal attacks.

 Deal with those who perpetrate personal attacks but don't turn a blind eye when those doing the attacking happen to share the same cable beliefs.

 At the point Markle made his post, was there really need for it, and in such a provocative manner?

 However, that is probably more indicative of a culture of personalities and clique's as opposed any sort of cable belief, as evidenced by the fact I called into question Markl's way of broaching the debate and I get attacked for not believing in cables and the same pattern has continued through the thread.

 Now regarding the "debate", do I think cables make a difference, yes,

 can I explain or quantify what diference they make to me personally in any scentific way, no,

 do I want to listen to and hear the sceptics opinions and scientific data regarding the science and technical details of equipment including cables, yes, 

 will it detract from my music and equipment journey and discovery, no

 Will I continue to try new equipment including cables as and when I can afford them or want to try a different sound even if I have read and heard all about science's lack of evidence for this, yes.

 Is it healthy to recognise and listen to differing opinions, yes


----------



## Arainach

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *yotacowboy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I don't have proof either way...

 ...and actually, I'm quite happy with that predicament. without getting too philosophical, I quite enjoy the idea that there is no universal truth in this matter. What I don't enjoy is when other people make certain universal claims, and blame their beliefs on a perversion of empirical science or a perversion of subjective beauty._

 

In case you hadn't noticed, it's impossible to prove a negative. The burden of proof is on those who claim a difference exists - logically, we must assume that no difference is there until evidence for a difference exists.


----------



## Vul Kuolun

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Must not be in this thread. I've replied to markl's comments twice in this thread: post #60 and post #64, neither of which had to do with a kiddy pool. My comments in both of these posts were specifically related to the exchange between markl's and Sovkiller. I was basically saying that I agreed with markl. If his reviews of headphones and amps and so forth are credible, then why would his reviews of cables not be credible? That was the context._

 

The term "kiddy pool" wasn't used in the context of your posts #60 and #64, that's right, i messed this up accidentaly. Sorry for wrongly accusing you.
 But the point doesn't change, you aplauded a primitive personal attack that says nothing else than what i summarised here: http://www.head-fi.org/forums/3921583-post402.html

 Nothing against expressing your private viewpoint on a subject as a mod, but if i was a mod, sorry, i'd just refrain from supporting primitive ad hominem attacks.

 Imagine the reputation you could have gained in the wooden ears camp gently reminding at this point of the discussion that these are exactly the behavioral patterns that make the discussion loose all the fun, like mbriant just did above.


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *stevenkelby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Thanks. How would you propose we deal with posts (not people) that are not respectful and courteous?_

 

As a group, we should agree to not tolerate disrespectful and discourteous behavior. The moderators don't have time to police everything. It's up to us to demand it from ourselves.

 I've learned an interesting thing from internet chat boards. I used to think that people reacted based on their beliefs and what they knew. I've discovered that many people react emotionally, and logic or the topic at hand have nothing to do with it. There are some people around here who would disagree violently with me if I said "the sky is blue and the sun rises in the East". I always try to respond in kind- if someone is listening and thinking, I'll politely share what I think and listen to what they say and consider their arguments. If they're pissy or rude, I tell them where they can get off the bus. The worst thing for trying to learn or figure things out is to become entrenched in "sides".

 The goal of all this isn't to win. It's to try to illuminate the truth from our own particular angles All opinions are not created equal. The ones that stand up are the ones that are well supported. But some opinions are just poor opinions, regardless of how vigorously you believe in them and no matter how aggressive you are in promoting them.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## yotacowboy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Arainach* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_In case you hadn't noticed, it's impossible to prove a negative. The burden of proof is on those who claim a difference exists - logically, we must assume that no difference is there until evidence for a difference exists._

 

logically, yes. epistemologically, well, I'm not sure.


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *pabbi1* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Steve, I have read well in excess of a hundred of your (5000) posts which immediately pounce on someone's observation of a cable difference with the 'wire don't matter' mantra._

 

Oh! Well, I can help you with that. If you don't want to hear what I have to say, you are under no obligation to read my posts. Please just happily skip by them. Rest assured that there are people who do appreciate my contributions here. I'm not here to live up to your approval, and I'm not requiring you to pay attention to what I say. You can be sure that when you offer unsolicited opinions on the value of my contributions, I'll be doing exactly the same for you.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *pabbi1* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Guess not - the only thing you fear is people not seeing your omniscient posts_

 

straw man... ad hominem...

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *pabbi1* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Sorry - I got your response the first time I read it, and have seen nothing new since._

 

Why did it take you reading hundreds of posts to come to that conclusion? I'm sure your time is valuable. Please by all means, go read something else.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## Riboge

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Arainach* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_In case you hadn't noticed, it's impossible to prove a negative. The burden of proof is on those who claim a difference exists - logically, we must assume that no difference is there until evidence for a difference exists._

 

I hate to get involved at this level at this point but this is one of the most maddening pseudo-arguments of the believers in the sameness of all well-made cables. It's all in your assumed narrative: Do you envision a group of folk who from the beginning believe all wire sounds the same being challenged by a new person claiming to hear a difference? Or, do you envision a world in which many but not all people hear a difference being challenged by someone insisting they all sound alike as must be?

 "The" negative in the first is 'Cables don't always sound the same'.
 "The" negative in the second is 'Cables don't ever sound different'.

 Why is it logical to "assume that no difference is there until evidence...exists" when thru all of human history man has begun with the evidence of his senses, even though lately we have learned to overrule this sometimes when other kinds of evidence meet the burden of disproof? Whether the initial belief is that something is or is not the case, the burden of proof has always been on those who wish to establish a different truth.

 That still leaves room for argument about which came first. All I'm saying is it is not obvious or certain which is the negative, so proof/evidence is relevant either way.


----------



## Kees

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Vul Kuolun* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_....
 But the point doesn't change, you aplauded *a primitive personal attack *that says nothing else than what i summarised here: http://www.head-fi.org/forums/3921583-post402.html

 Nothing against expressing your private viewpoint on a subject as a mod, but if i was a mod, sorry, i'd just refrain from supporting *primitive ad hominem attacks.*
 Imagine the reputation you could have gained in the wooden ears camp gently reminding at this point of the discussion that these are exactly the behavioral patterns that make the discussion loose all the fun, like mbriant just did above._

 

Could you explain how Markl's post was a "primitive personal attack"?

 Could you explain how your posts (this one for instance) is helping any in the discussion?


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *yotacowboy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_you have the ability to provide me with information - but when, and how that information becomes MY knowledge is entirely up to me._

 

That's pretty much self evident. There are people here who have benefitted from my contributions, and there are people here who I have benefitted from. This is the internet. Sort out the information that interests you and do with it what you will. Filter.

 I won't bother to comment on the jaw dropping irony of this "me too" reply to yotacowboy's quote above... _You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink._

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## yotacowboy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Riboge* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I hate to get involved at this level at this point but this is one of the most maddening pseudo-arguments of the believers in the sameness of all well-made cables. It's all in your assumed narrative: Do you envision a group of folk who from the beginning believe all wire sounds the same being challenged by a new person claiming to hear a difference? Or, do you envision a world in which many but not all people hear a difference being challenged by someone insisting they all sound alike as must be?

 "The" negative in the first is 'Cables don't always sound the same'.
 "The" negative in the second is 'Cables don't ever sound different'.

 Why is it logical to "assume that no difference is there until evidence...exists" when thru all of human history man has begun with the evidence of his senses, even though lately we have learned to overrule this sometimes when other kinds of evidence meet the burden of disproof? Whether the initial belief is that something is or is not the case, the burden of proof has always been on those who wish to establish a different truth.

 That still leaves room for argument about which came first. All I'm saying is it is not obvious or certain which is the negative, so proof/evidence is relevant either way._

 

thanks, dude.

 ...and exactly why that little "logical fallacy" is a huge can of worms, and why i prefaced it... we could spend decades, even centuries, muddling around in that discussion - so be warned! it's a fun one!


----------



## Arainach

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Riboge* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I hate to get involved at this level at this point but this is one of the most maddening pseudo-arguments of the believers in the sameness of all well-made cables. It's all in your assumed narrative: Do you envision a group of folk who from the beginning believe all wire sounds the same being challenged by a new person claiming to hear a difference? Or, do you envision a world in which many but not all people hear a difference being challenged by someone insisting they all sound alike as must be?

 "The" negative in the first is 'Cables don't always sound the same'.
 "The" negative in the second is 'Cables don't ever sound different'.

 Why is it logical to "assume that no difference is there until evidence...exists" when thru all of human history man has begun with the evidence of his senses, even though lately we have learned to overrule this sometimes when other kinds of evidence meet the burden of disproof? Whether the initial belief is that something is or is not the case, the burden of proof has always been on those who wish to establish a different truth.

 That still leaves room for argument about which came first. All I'm saying is it is not obvious or certain which is the negative, so proof/evidence is relevant either way._

 

You can measure any two well-made cables you want and all the measurements we can come up with will be, within testing error, identical. It's impossible to disprove the claim that 'well there's a still a difference that your instruments can't see' since no matter how precise the equipment gets the claim can still be made. The burden of proof is on the person that claims a difference exists, since scientific methods can't detect any such difference.


----------



## Kees

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Arainach* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_In case you hadn't noticed, it's impossible to prove a negative. The burden of proof is on those who claim a difference exists - logically, we must assume that no difference is there until evidence for a difference exists._

 

Nonsense.
 What you are saying is that before Newton formulated the laws of gravity "we must assume that objects didn't fall".


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *yotacowboy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_So when someone says, "Cables have never, will never and could never make an audible difference to anyone, anywhere, at any time, under any circumstance" - I must ask, how do they know it all?_

 

Who has said that? I certainly haven't. It's perfectly possible to create a cable that changes the sound. It just isn't possible to create a cable that sounds more accurate because it conducts better than an average well made cable.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## Uncle Erik

Sorry I did not reply earlier, but thank you, Markl, for the explanation of your experience and how you came to notice differences in cables. There was a Pinot behind that, after all.

 You've said that the skeptics are unable or unwilling to try a cable. Alright, I'll try one. What interconnect do you recommend, as compared to Blue Jeans, that will make an obvious difference? And would you recommend a SACD or two that will highlight those differences?

 I am willing to risk $200-$300 on an interconnect. And I would prefer to buy a used one from Audiogon, as well. I figure that would probably get something that retailed around $500-$600.

 I have a decent selection of headphones, so I will listen with whatever ones you think will be most revealing of the differences.

 If I do not hear the difference, I'd like to mail you the two cables and a reference disc or two. You can listen and point out where the differences are, then send them back.

 No, nothing scientific. However, I am willing to do this on your terms and discuss what happens publicly. What do you think?


----------



## stevenkelby

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Arainach* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You can measure any two well-made cables you want and all the measurements we can come up with will be, within testing error, identical._

 

Even if 2 cables measure differently, who's to say they sound different? Couldn't you just say "sure they measure different but not enough to be audible, therefore, they sound the same?"


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *mbriant* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_But here's one example for you that I've taken the time to un-delete a dozen or so posts, to show exactly what I'm talking about._

 

The link is broken.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## stevenkelby

Quote:


 Originally Posted by stevenkelby 
 Thanks. How would you propose we deal with posts (not people) that are not respectful and courteous? 
 


  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_As a group, we should agree to not tolerate disrespectful and discourteous behavior. The moderators don't have time to police everything. It's up to us to demand it from ourselves.
_

 


 Yes but that obviously isn't, hasn't, or can't work so how do we deal with posts that break the rules? 

 It's a lot of work for mods as it is, and they still miss a lot of rule-breaking posts. When they do edit or remove a post, often the culprit doesn't even know they've been censored, and they do the same thing again anyway.

 Some means of enforcing stronger discipline would help a lot I think.


----------



## monolith

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Kees* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Nonsense.
 What you are saying is that before Newton formulated the laws of gravity "we must assume that objects didn't fall"._

 

Nonsense. Newton explained why things fall, not that they fall. Before the first thing fell, as it were, that assumption would have to have been made.

 To use your analogy, the current state of affairs with cables is like no one having ever seen anything fall.


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_And on top the skeptics are the worng ones, that need to be "secluded" into a new subforum_

 

I'm sorry, I haven't been paying attention to this. The idea is to create two equal forums on the same level of the hierarchy, right? It isn't one forum for the believers, and a lower level forum for the skeptics to sit in the corner in?

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *stevenkelby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Yes but that obviously isn't, hasn't, or can't work so how do we deal with posts that break the rules? Some means of enforcing stronger discipline would help a lot I think._

 

It's been my experience that net copping always makes things worse and inflames the arguments. It's best for the community to deal with the problem on its own.

 The reason that this thread has gone so far afield is clear to me, if it isn't to any of the rest of you. The thread started out wrong with the title "cable haters". Two moderators came in and instead of defusing the situation by discouraging the ad hominem attacks, they both threw gasoline on it by abandoning neutrality and taking sides themselves.

 This thread is not being thread crapped by the skeptics. It's being thread crapped by people who can't accept differing opinions and just move on. If anyone here is angry or frustrated, you are doing it wrong. Let it go and just focus instead on adding your own contribution to the mix.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## Riboge

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_As a group, we should agree to not tolerate disrespectful and discourteous behavior. The moderators don't have time to police everything. It's up to us to demand it from ourselves.

 I've learned an interesting thing from internet chat boards. I used to think that people reacted based on their beliefs and what they knew. I've discovered that many people react emotionally, and logic or the topic at hand have nothing to do with it. There are some people around here who would disagree violently with me if I said "the sky is blue and the sun rises in the East". I always try to respond in kind- if someone is listening and thinking, I'll politely share what I think and listen to what they say and consider their arguments. If they're pissy or rude, I tell them where they can get off the bus. The worst thing for trying to learn or figure things out is to become entrenched in "sides".

 The goal of all this isn't to win. It's to try to illuminate the truth from our own particular angles All opinions are not created equal. The ones that stand up are the ones that are well supported. But some opinions are just poor opinions, regardless of how vigorously you believe in them and no matter how aggressive you are in promoting them.

 See ya
 Steve_

 

From my experience reading and interacting with you in many posts, what you mean is smarmy innuendos and implications and making fun of others at their expense, i.e., implicit or implied insults and tactics that substitute for argument, are okay but explicit, frank statements counter to what you say or the way you say them are not.

 Your favorite ploy is to provoke others thru doing these things and evading or even lying whenever someone makes a telling counter to what you've said or points out a contradiction until they get exasperated and say something emotional or ad hominem. Then you say "Gotcha!" and declare them invalidated for doing so. Literally. Claiming that you are not about wanting to win is audacious hypocrisy or monumental lack of self-awareness.

 You are often not logical or not respectful and generally hypocritical, especially in preaching about how to properly and respectful discuss things. You are just skillful at violating all these principles sneakily and entertainingly(to the prurient).

 This is indeed ad hominem but you open the door to this when you so often and so smugly presume to define and comment on how others behave and should behave in discourse.

 And it's not as if I, for one, haven't tried to get this across privately. When I did you started taunting me about being so sensitive or some such and even addressed a post to me saying something like 'I hope this doesn't make you cry again..."

 Self- and peer- policing doesn't and could never work with you. You show no sign of ever taking in what others say by way of efforts to do this. You just say they don't have to read your posts or they can just go away altogether.


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I'm sorry, I haven't been paying attention to this. The idea is to create two equal forums on the same level of the hierarchy, right? It isn't one forum for the believers, and a lower level forum for the skeptics to sit in the corner in?

 See ya
 Steve_

 

Well even while I know that this will never be the official designation for that section, it has been called already as such, and I think that will be the future of it, honestly I will never bother to post there, if it is created, I hate to be segregated and discriminated just for the way I think on a given topic, I had enough of that crap in my native country that was why I emigrate to this considered as a "free country"...


  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *slwiser* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_No you did not say that my posting the link to the paper was tread crapping but noUseName did. 

 Just check in post 347 on page 18 to get to the link._

 

I read the whole article and even while it is by far a conclusive article on the subject, it does not compare any cables, barely mention a few materials, and it is IMO more like a general approach to the propagation of the waves on the conductors generally talking (well indeed he uses copper as a reference material) It was also done, according to the author, intorducing some aproximations, and considerations, that may affect the results, of course needed, otherwise will be a whole life work. I do feel that was a good and respectful approach to the problem, even while at the end it concludes nothing relevant to our problem...but at least he introduced a few more elements than the clasic C,L,Z, we all know off...still not an actual comparison, or a conlcusive experiement, of if those are actually heard or part of the differences claimed, but an interesting reading IMO...


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Riboge* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_From my experience reading and interacting with you in many posts, what you mean is smarmy innuendos and implications and making fun of others at their expense, i.e., implicit or implied insults_

 

I have a technique that I try when dealing with particularly aggressive or passive-aggressive people. I turn their own techniques back onto themselves to see if they can recognize them. You've been looking in a mirror.

 Just look at my post and your reaction to it. Can't you see who the one who is out of line is?

 See ya
 Steve

 Edit:

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Riboge* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_This is indeed ad hominem but you open the door to this when you..._

 

I love it when people try to blame others for their own lack of control. It's like the abusive husband who says, "Don't make me hit you!"


----------



## sejarzo

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_ ... but 'removing human perception' has never been a moto of the engineering world...._

 

But removing erroneous conclusions certainly has, correct?

 When one is a chemical engineer that deals with extremely hazardous/toxic/explosive substances, believe me--one tries not to "perceive" things but rather deal with (presumably) objective testing and numbers. Maybe that clarifies my outlook.....but I have to say, my EE friends that work in high voltage operations likewise don't want to "directly perceive" some of that stuff either, if you catch my drift!

 I work in pilot plant and process development operations that require a lot of statistical analysis to determine if results are really different--separating signal from noise, right? To me, that's taking perception/"hunches" out of the picture and forcing a decision based on a result with much more proof that it's not an aberration.


----------



## Riboge

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I have a technique that I try when dealing with particularly aggressive or passive-aggressive people. I turn their own techniques back onto themselves to see if they can recognize them. You've been looking in a mirror.

 Just look at my post and your reaction to it. Can't you see who the one who is out of line is?

 See ya
 Steve_

 

QED to its being you.

 (Later: I realize I may need to explain this comment:
 1. no response to what I wrote about him despite my citing specifics/evidence and things many members can recognize.
 2. No recognition of the fact that his response is nothing but an attempt to 'win'.
 3. Knowing that I am a psychiatrist, his comment about needing to look in the mirror (rather than being the mirror) is a clever but sneaky insult to me professionally and totally unrelated to what's under discussion.
 4. Note the assumed superiority of implying he's been instructing and using a technique on me as if I'm a student or patient.
 5. More of the ploy of being provocative and wanting to make out the one he annoys to be emotionally wrong some how; whereas, we know from earlier in this thread that many have that reaction to him and that very polite feedback is simply ignored.)


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Well even while I know that this will never be the official designation for that section, it has been called already as such, and I think that will be the future of it, honestly I will never bother to post there, if it is created, I hate to be segregated and discriminated just for the way I think on a given topic, I had enough of that crap in my native country that was why I emigrate to this considered as a "free country"._

 

I think it will be quite different from what you expect. I've been around discussion forums going all the way back to the early days of usenet, and I've seen things like this tried before. It's going to have the exact opposite effect than the people trying to squelch disagreement expect. The skeptics forum will end up being the interesting one with plenty of fireworks and excitement, because that's where people will be discussing both sides of the issue. The believers forum will end up being long meandering posts of vague impressions followed by a couple of "me too" posts. Pretty soon, the believers will get bored and try to invade the skeptics forum, starting the battles all over again. You can bet things won't be boring!

 I'll be participating wherever talk about speakers, tweaks and skeptical cable discussion is allowed. Those are my interests, along with Gear Fi camera discussions, the music forum, turntables, ipods, sound restoration techniques, smart ways to get the most bang for the buck, and using macs as media sources. Always lots to talk about at Head Fi.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *sejarzo* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_But removing erroneous conclusions certainly has, correct?

 When one is a chemical engineer that deals with extremely hazardous/toxic/explosive substances, believe me--one tries not to "perceive" things but rather deal with (presumably) objective testing and numbers. Maybe that clarifies my outlook.....but I have to say, my EE friends that work in high voltage operations likewise don't want to "directly perceive" some of that stuff either, if you catch my drift!

 I work in pilot plant and process development operations that require a lot of statistical analysis to determine if results are really different--separating signal from noise right? To me, that's taking perception/"hunches" out of the picture and forcing a decision based on a result with much more proof that it's not an aberration._

 


[size=xx-large]GOOD STUFF!!![/size]

 I worked in a cosmetic factory for a while and that was how they measure the quality, nobody smells a perfume, or a deodorant there, all is ruled by numbers...period...that is the only accurate way of controling a process...


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I think it will be quite different from what you expect. I've been around discussion forums going all the way back to the early days of usenet, and I've seen things like this tried before. It's going to have the exact opposite effect than the people trying to squelch disagreement expect. The skeptics forum will end up being the interesting one with plenty of fireworks and excitement, because that's where people will be discussing both sides of the issue. The believers forum will end up being long meandering posts of vague impressions followed by a couple of "me too" posts. Pretty soon, the believers will get bored and try to invade the skeptics forum, starting the battles all over again. You can bet things won't be boring!

 I'll be participating wherever talk about speakers, tweaks and skeptical cable discussion is allowed. Those are my interests, along with Gear Fi camera discussions, the music forum, turntables, ipods, sound restoration techniques, smart ways to get the most bang for the buck, and using macs as media sources. Always lots to talk about at Head Fi.

 See ya
 Steve_

 

If this is the case and you believe that this will be the end of the *ideological segregation* I will keep my eyes open, and I do wish to be wrong honestly...I would like to see and read more about this fascinating field, and get into experiments that will offer some input...till now the few I have done home, and have heard off, have been completely supportive to my ideas...


 BTW I will vote for you as a moderator... !!!!


----------



## yotacowboy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I have a technique that I try when dealing with particularly aggressive or passive-aggressive people. I turn their own techniques back onto themselves to see if they can recognize them. You've been looking in a mirror._

 

But you just ignore me, Steve!

 that makes me so sad
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 I hope you enjoy the new forum.


----------



## yotacowboy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Riboge* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_QED to its being you.

 (Later: I realize I may need to explain this comment:
 1. no response to what I wrote about him despite my citing specifics/evidence and things many members can recognize.
 2. No recognition of the fact that his response is nothing but an attempt to 'win'.
 3. Knowing that I am a psychiatrist, his comment about needing to look in the mirror (rather than being the mirror) is a clever but sneaky insult to me professionally and totally unrelated to what's under discussion.
 4. Note the assumed superiority of implying he's been instructing and using a technique on me as if I'm a student or patient.
 5. More of the ploy of being provocative and wanting to make out the one he annoys to be emotionally wrong some how; whereas, we know from earlier in this thread that many have that reaction to him and that very polite feedback is simply ignored.)_

 

I just have to giggle a little here. i mean, c'mon! Steve's username IS bigshot, afterall...


----------



## sacd lover

[size=xx-large]*I cant wait for the new cable forum!!!*[/size]






 See ya 
 Earl


----------



## 1117

I would just like to interject a moment here and congratulate you all for making a thread that, frankly, just surpasses all reality tv shows I have ever seen. The entertainment here is TOP NOTCH!

 I wish that we could make a show, put everyone under one roof, and see what happens. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I'll be manager, since it was my idea, and I'll get my 10%. Part of that money will be used to buy cables for people in the show to use, which will be used to cause more controversy for those under the roof, which will boost my ratings, which will give me a higher-yielding 10% next time, enabling me to buy more expensive cables for people to use, which will cause more controversy...

 Oh, I love you guys. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 By the way, the show needs a name. Open to suggestions.


----------



## chesebert

Strange how the activists only troll this forum...go bug the timezone folks and tell them their $5000 watch is no better than a timex.....

 Or better yet, go bug the folks at perfume of life and tell them their $500 bottle perfume has the same chemical ingridents as the drugstore brands.....

 Where has the concept of individual liberty and freedom gone? People should have the freedom to spend their money however they want without others nagging at them constantly. 

 Here is the simple answer to everything cabled/hi-end/luxury goods - do not buy it if you:
 (1) can't afford it; 
 (2) don't think its worth the asking price; or
 (3) can't afford it and don't think its worth the asking price.

 The activist should respect others' individual liberty and freedom and keep their activist agendas to themselves. If you must, please take your activist message to a public forum, which headfi is NOT.


----------



## monolith

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Strange how the activists only troll this forum...go bug the timezone folks and tell them their $5000 watch is no better than a timex.....

 Or better yet, go bug the folks at perfume of life and tell them their $500 bottle perfume has the same chemical ingridents as the drugstore brands.....

 Where has the concept of individual liberty and freedom gone? People should have the freedom to spend their money however they want without others nagging at them constantly. 

 Here is the simple answer to everything cabled/hi-end/luxury goods - do not buy it if you:
 (1) can't afford it; 
 (2) don't think its worth the asking price; or
 (3) can't afford it and don't think its worth the asking price.

 The activist should respect others' individual liberty and freedom and keep their activist agendas to themselves. If you must, please take your activist message to a public forum, which headfi is NOT._

 

Those examples are irrelevant. More expensive watches either keep better time, are made of more precious materials or look better (which the buyers will admit as a reason for getting them). Watches aren't just used to keep time. Audio cables are just used to carry signal from one component to the next. Arguably they're also used for looking nice, but most high end cable buyers aren't happy to admit they're buying crazy expensive cable because it's pretty. 

 If two perfumes have exactly the same chemical content, they smell the same (just like if two cables measure identically in every possible way, they "sound" the same). People buying a more expensive one over a cheaper one would be buying for the brand (which is something else I imagine many cable buyers do but don't want to admit) or because they think it smells better because it's more expensive. If that's the case I'll be first in line to tell them the same things if I ever start frequenting perfume or cologne forums in which such nonsense is posted. That brand name buying thing applies to watches as well, come to think of it.

 Also, I believe you'll find that Head-Fi is indeed a public forum.


----------



## monolith

It occurs to me that the naming of these forthcoming thought-policed forums is quite important. A lot of the posts on the current cable forum are questions from people new to the hobby and looking for reasonable advice. 

 If one of them inadvertantly stumbles into the true believer forum and asks what iPod LOD they should use to connect their iPod to their PA2V2 and someone insists they use some gold ALO cable or something to that effect because it sounds best, sirens should go off summoning "skeptics" to make sure the poster realises that a $30 LOD will work just as well for them. If I was to post that there, would I then get banned?

 For reasons like this, I think any sort of "skeptic" forum should retain some sort of neutral name (like the current one), as that will be the only one in which to get balanced opinions or answers to questions.


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *monolith* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Those examples are irrelevant. More expensive watches either keep better time, are made of more precious materials or look better (which the buyers will admit as a reason for getting them). Watches aren't just used to keep time. Audio cables are just used to carry signal from one component to the next. Arguably they're also used for looking nice, but most high end cable buyers aren't happy to admit they're buying crazy expensive cable because it's pretty. 

 If two perfumes have exactly the same chemical content, they smell the same (just like if two cables measure identically in every possible way, they "sound" the same). People buying a more expensive one over a cheaper one would be buying for the brand (which is something else I imagine many cable buyers do but don't want to admit) or because they think it smells better because it's more expensive. If that's the case I'll be first in line to tell them the same things if I ever start frequenting perfume or cologne forums in which such nonsense is posted. That brand name buying thing applies to watches as well, come to think of it.

 Also, I believe you'll find that Head-Fi is indeed a public forum._

 

Headfi is NOT a public forum.

 1) Headfi is not publicly funded
 2) Members have to sign an agreement before he/she can join/post
 3) Rights of any individual member is subject to the agreement signed assuming the clauses in the agreement are not repugnant to the law of the land (U.S.)
 4) At best Headfi extended a licence to the individual members to come onto their private property. 

 Imagine headfi as a private party held at someone's backyard (private property); and you, the onlooker traveling on the adjacent public road wanted to join; you can only join if the owner of the property extend a licence to you, which otherwise you would be charged as a trespessor. 

Head-Fi.org: Headphones, iPod earphones, portable audio, MP3 players, high-end audio webspace is the private property of Jude; any conversation held here are private conversations, although public has the right to view, but not participate. To parcipate, one has to get a licence from the property owner, in this case sign the agreement provided by Jude. The mods are responsible for certain section of Jude's property, and has the power to revoke any member's license as they see fit, just like you can kick anyone from your property if you no longer want them on your property, subject to any easement they have, which is not applicable here. 

*So how is headfi public again?*


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Here is the simple answer to everything cabled/hi-end/luxury goods - do not buy it if you:

 (1) can't afford it; or
 (2) don't think its worth the asking price; or
 (3) can't afford it and don't think its worth the asking price; or

 (4) *don't buy it, if after trying them, they did not make any difference, and you have no other use for them...*_

 

You always seem to forgot the most important topic while talking about the skeptics, activits, or the name you want to call them, and is the first hand experience *many of them do have*, with the items in question, so I added that one to the reasons you listed....I think that it is also a valid one right? Or am I wrong?


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You always seem to forgot the most important topic while talking about the skeptics, activits, or the name you want to call them, and is the first hand experience *many of them do have*, with the items in question, so I added that one to the reasons you listed....I think that it is also a valid one right? Or am I wrong?_

 

your 4th point rolls right into the subjective worth point; so I don't see a real need for the 4th point.


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *monolith* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Those examples are irrelevant. More expensive watches either keep better time, are made of more precious materials or look better (which the buyers will admit as a reason for getting them). Watches aren't just used to keep time. Audio cables are just used to carry signal from one component to the next. Arguably they're also used for looking nice, but most high end cable buyers aren't happy to admit they're buying crazy expensive cable because it's pretty. 

 If two perfumes have exactly the same chemical content, they smell the same (just like if two cables measure identically in every possible way, they "sound" the same). People buying a more expensive one over a cheaper one would be buying for the brand (which is something else I imagine many cable buyers do but don't want to admit) or because they think it smells better because it's more expensive. If that's the case I'll be first in line to tell them the same things if I ever start frequenting perfume or cologne forums in which such nonsense is posted. That brand name buying thing applies to watches as well, come to think of it._

 


 [size=xx-large]GOOD STUFF!!![/size]


 I have two bottles here, one of Jean Paul Gaultier "Le Male", that cost me like $50.00 and another that I got in the same store for daily use, as a reco from the lady, that is called "Blue". They came in the same bottle, same can, same perfume, I paid $25.00 for that one.

 I have used both indistinctly, and I feel now that I was literally ripped off by the $50.00 one, as that one is exactly the same....later on I found out that both were made in the same factory, one was sold as a brand name, another was not sold as brand name...From that point on, I only ask for Blue!!!

 Are you aware also that the SAR watches that cost you around $600.00 with all powers, and many others even below those prices, use the same exact ETA movement as the Rolex and Omegas, that sell for ten times as much, how do you call that?


----------



## monolith

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_*So how is headfi public again?*_

 

It's public in that anyone can join and express their opinions on matters audio, whatever they may be. Until such time as the user agreement stipulates you can't claim most cables sound the same or using blocks of hard wood to damp vibrations is nonsense, it'll continue being a public forum with respect to audio opinions.

 If you want to get into semantics about being able to say *anything*, then there basically aren't any public forums anywhere, because just about anywhere in the world there's something you can say that'll get you jailed or banned, etc.


----------



## monolith

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_[size=xx-large]GOOD STUFF!!![/size]_

 

[size=xx-large]*THANK YOU.*[/size]

 Hehe. That's fun.


----------



## Arainach

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Where has the concept of individual liberty and freedom gone? People should have the freedom to spend their money however they want without others nagging at them constantly. 

 The activist should respect others' individual liberty and freedom and keep their activist agendas to themselves. If you must, please take your activist message to a public forum, which headfi is NOT._

 

Where has the concept of individual liberty and freedom gone? People should have the freedom to criticize whatever they want without others nagging at them constantly.

 The activist*s* should respect others' individual liberty and freedom and keep their activist agendas to themselves. If you must, please take your activist message to a forum that you own, support, and manage, which Head-Fi is NOT.


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_your 4th point rolls right into the subjective worth point; so I don't see a real need for the 4th point._

 

But you didn't mention the first hand experience, that I want to remark it...as whomever read that out fo context may feel they are speculating about the value, with no experience at all, and some of them are not...


----------



## tomjtx

By the way, the show needs a name. Open to suggestions.[/QUOTE]


 "The Tower of Cable"


----------



## tomjtx

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Strange how the activists only troll this forum...go bug the timezone folks and tell them their $5000 watch is no better than a timex.....

 Or better yet, go bug the folks at perfume of life and tell them their $500 bottle perfume has the same chemical ingridents as the drugstore brands.....

 Where has the concept of individual liberty and freedom gone? People should have the freedom to spend their money however they want without others nagging at them constantly. 

 Here is the simple answer to everything cabled/hi-end/luxury goods - do not buy it if you:
 (1) can't afford it; 
 (2) don't think its worth the asking price; or
 (3) can't afford it and don't think its worth the asking price.

 The activist should respect others' individual liberty and freedom and keep their activist agendas to themselves. If you must, please take your activist message to a public forum, which headfi is NOT._

 

This post is replete with irony. Thank you for that humorous moment, no matter how unintentional it may have been


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tomjtx* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_By the way, the show needs a name. Open to suggestions.

 "The Tower of Cable"_

 

*"The Cable Myth Corner"*


----------



## tomjtx

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *monolith* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_It occurs to me that the naming of these forthcoming thought-policed forums is quite important. A lot of the posts on the current cable forum are questions from people new to the hobby and looking for reasonable advice. 

 If one of them inadvertantly stumbles into the true believer forum and asks what iPod LOD they should use to connect their iPod to their PA2V2 and someone insists they use some gold ALO cable or something to that effect because it sounds best, sirens should go off summoning "skeptics" to make sure the poster realises that a $30 LOD will work just as well for them. If I was to post that there, would I then get banned?

 For reasons like this, I think any sort of "skeptic" forum should retain some sort of neutral name (like the current one), as that will be the only one in which to get balanced opinions or answers to questions._

 

How about the "fair and balanced cable forum" Oh, fox already has that.

 OK, the "No BS cable forum"

 "Cable for the intellectually capable"

 Cables for Cuckoos" that would have to be the believers forum.

 Cables for Cocky People for the skeptics forum

 The Sceptic Cable Forum for those that keep mispelling the word skeptic and as a double entendre.

 Just goofing guys, please , no harm intended, just humor


----------



## 3x331m

The fellowship of the cables.

 First episode: The Interconnects.


----------



## Wmcmanus

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *dazzer1975* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_It was on page 1 of this thread whereMarkl refers to sceptics as young, inexperienced and financially inadequate.

 My responses didn't help the situation, but being a cable believer, as I have had to state for the umpteenth time now and yet still drew comments attacking me for being a sceptic???? I didn't think calling all sceptics young and poor would really provide the best foundation for rational debate.

 Look how the thread has turned out and look at the ones who are being accused most vehemently of engaging in personal attacks.

 Deal with those who perpetrate personal attacks but don't turn a blind eye when those doing the attacking happen to share the same cable beliefs.

 At the point Markle made his post, was there really need for it, and in such a provocative manner?

 However, that is probably more indicative of a culture of personalities and clique's as opposed any sort of cable belief, as evidenced by the fact I called into question Markl's way of broaching the debate and I get attacked for not believing in cables and the same pattern has continued through the thread.

 Now regarding the "debate", do I think cables make a difference, yes,

 can I explain or quantify what diference they make to me personally in any scentific way, no,

 do I want to listen to and hear the sceptics opinions and scientific data regarding the science and technical details of equipment including cables, yes, 

 will it detract from my music and equipment journey and discovery, no

 Will I continue to try new equipment including cables as and when I can afford them or want to try a different sound even if I have read and heard all about science's lack of evidence for this, yes.

 Is it healthy to recognise and listen to differing opinions, yes_

 

Now I'm totally confused. What does markl's post on page 1 of this thread, which I've now read for at least the 3rd time, have to do with me? How did I supposedly "applaud" this? My posts (#60 and #64 in this thread) related only to markl's debate with Sovkiller, which had to do with some of his subsequent posts. 

 I agreed with markl that if his cable reviews were to be considered rubbish, then it must also be true that his favorable reviews of RudiStor amps must also be rubbish. I happen to think that neither his cable reviews or his amp reviews are rubbish, but I thought his manner of expression (by using the RudiStor example) was spot on. In other words, if someone was going to hit him below the belt, then he might as well come back with something that will hurt just as much. Of course, he was merely being dramatic to make a point, but I thought it was a quite effective mode of argumentation. That's all. 

 But even in his post on the first page, which I've yet to respond to, I still don't see anything about a kiddy pool.


----------



## Wmcmanus

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Vul Kuolun* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The term "kiddy pool" wasn't used in the context of your posts #60 and #64, that's right, i messed this up accidentaly. Sorry for wrongly accusing you.
 But the point doesn't change, you aplauded a primitive personal attack that says nothing else than what i summarised here: http://www.head-fi.org/forums/3921583-post402.html

 Nothing against expressing your private viewpoint on a subject as a mod, but if i was a mod, sorry, i'd just refrain from supporting primitive ad hominem attacks.

 Imagine the reputation you could have gained in the wooden ears camp gently reminding at this point of the discussion that these are exactly the behavioral patterns that make the discussion loose all the fun, like mbriant just did above._

 

So am I getting this right? I mean, let's have some other people look at these links and see if I have what I think I'm reading here right?

 First, you say that the term "kiddy pool" wasn't used in the context of my posts #60 or #64 or (I'll add, if you don't mind) in any of my posts on this thread or any other thread I've posted on in 5+ years and over 8,500 posts. Am I right so far?

 Then you said, correctly, that you "messed this up accidentally" and that you're sorry for "wrongly accusing" me. Fine, apology accepted. Up until there I was with you.

 Then you say that I applauded "primal personal attacks" that says "nothing else but" what you said in another post (your initial attack against me) which you then conveniently quote again. 

 Here's where I get lost. I didn't "applaud" a "primal personal attack" by markl in any way, shape or form. For one, he didn't make a personal attack against Sovkiller. Certainly not in any part of his posts that I quoted in my posts #60 and #64 in this thread. Read what I quoted again and tell me where in those quoted passages markl is making a "primal personal attack" and I'll hand you a cigar for your creative imagination. He simply replied to Sovkiller that if his cable reviews were rubbish than so were his RudiStor amp reviews. Fair enough. If his opinion cannot be relied on for one kind of review then it cannot be relied on for another. That's all I agreed with. Nothing more.

 Then you go on and tell us what you would or wouldn't do as a mod, again, essentially accusing me of supporting "primitive ad hominem attacks" which at this point you seem to be completely imagining. You've just admitted that I didn't do it, and then in the next couple of paragraphs you go on saying that I did. Which is it? The truth is that I didn't do such a thing. You only imagined that I did and you somehow cannot get this out of your head.

 Then you go on to say that "these are exactly the behavioral patterns that make the discussions lose (sic) all of the fun." What? That I agreed with markl concerning a valid point that he made in his exchange with Sovkiller? 

 Again, I encourage you to read again what I quoted from markl's posts and tell me where he made personal attacks that I applauded?

 The truth is, you've imagined all of this. I know that I deserve an apology, but I won't hold my breath.


----------



## jgonino

Seriously, how can you make fun of a guy with Santa as his avatar?

 People really need to lighten up a bit. Everyone cannot be right, therefore someone has to be wrong. I only hope that someday we will understand who.


----------



## Wmcmanus

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *jgonino* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Seriously, how can you make fun of a guy with Santa as his avatar?_

 

I don't think anyone has made fun of me. If they do, I'll simply put them on the naughty list and they'll get a lump of coal for Christmas next year. Don't say you haven't been warned!

  Quote:


 People really need to lighten up a bit. Everyone cannot be right, therefore someone has to be wrong. I only hope that someday we will understand who. 
 

It's possible, however, that everyone could be wrong.


----------



## 3x331m

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_It's possible, however, that everyone could be wrong._

 

The best line, so far. 

 What can be heard might not exist, and what could not be heard might also exist. You think you heard so you believe, and you don't believe because you also think that you did not hear. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I'm a nice guy.... I want no coal for Christmas... be nice to me.


----------



## Lazarus Short

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *1117* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_By the way, the show needs a name. Open to suggestions._

 

Horri-Fi


----------



## jgonino

I guess "made fun" was not the right choice of words. It seems that some people were just being very disrespectful.

 Nice title laz!


----------



## UseName

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *slwiser* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_No you did not say that my posting the link to the paper was tread crapping but noUseName did. 

 Just check in post 347 on page 18 to get to the link._

 

I honestly think it is NOT thread crapping... I said it to prove a point.


----------



## Vul Kuolun

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The truth is, you've imagined all of this. I know that I deserve an apology, but I won't hold my breath._

 

 Quote:


  Originally Posted by *markl* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_1. Most head-fiers are young and new to audio (not all, but let's say 70%+). So they also usually lack the kinds of systems capable of allowing them to hear differences in cables.

 2. Upon arrival here, they've just been told they need headphones they can barely afford, amps and better sources they can't, and now cables. Cables! That's the final straw! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	







 I reject your voodoo cables! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I reject things that I can't afford! (Natural human reaction.)

 3. You need developed ears and experience comparing lots of gear before things at the level of cables become clearly audible to you. Again, the crowd here is mostly younger and so often struggle to tell the difference between amps, let alone cables.

 4. The level of expectation for what kind of difference a cable can make is all wrong. They seem to be expecting some earth-shattering complete re-imagining of the sonics, but that's not what you get. They will not accept that the difference is much less than that, and likely falls outside the level at which they are currently capable of perceiving. 

 5. Inexperienced people pick the over-tweaked hyper-bright TV screen on the shop floor ("oooh, look at that!), the "louder" and bass-heavy pumping speaker in the wall of speakers at the Best Buy. That doesn't mean they are better devices or perform better at all, but at the level of their perception abilities, only differences that strong and glaring are perceived, and usually deemed "superior" even though they are not. When an audio cable does not "pop" like the loudest, most obnoxious speaker in the shop, they can't hear it and so think it's bunk.

 6. Young people (in general) do not just sit and listen to music (especially nowadays), doing nothing else. They're busy multi-tasking, and music is in the background of whatever else they are involved in. Of course, under these circumstances, how are they ever going to hear mere cable differences?

 7. They're in college and going through that de-programming process where everything they learned in school so far turns out to be mostly over-simplified pap. They are in that stage where they want to reject everything with a skeptic's eye. They're so disillusioned, they need *proof* of everything. They also think they know it all, and anything someone over 30 says is true must be a lie. I can say this because I went through it too, and so did everyone else. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I could go on, but I'll stop there. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

 Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_As they say here in Cayman, "You go, boy!!!" This thread has markl written all over it._

 

I know that your answer was not directly related to the cited post. But as a moderator, i'd expect some caution to whom you applaud, and which statements your supporting that are directly related to it. Or do you think markl's remarks characterise Steve well? I don't. 

 That's what Steve meant with "two moderators join and put some gasoline in the fire". Don't you recognise the impact that your words have in the context of beeing a moderator with the empowerment to push off a whole collective of people? In a discussion about exactly that point? Sorry, this seems insensible to me, even if you don't mean it that way. As a teacher, you surely know that words sometimes change their implication dependent on the situation and the receiving person(s).


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Then you go on and tell us what you would or wouldn't do as a mod, again, essentially accusing me of supporting "primitive ad hominem attacks" which at this point you seem to be completely imagining. You've just admitted that I didn't do it, and then in the next couple of paragraphs you go on saying that I did. Which is it? The truth is that I didn't do such a thing. You only imagined that I did and you somehow cannot get this out of your head.

 Then you go on to say that "these are exactly the behavioral patterns that make the discussions lose (sic) all of the fun." What? That I agreed with markl concerning a valid point that he made in his exchange with Sovkiller?

 Again, I encourage you to read again what I quoted from markl's posts and tell me where he made personal attacks that I applauded?

 The truth is, you've imagined all of this. I know that I deserve an apology, but I won't hold my breath._

 

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f11/ju...m-soon-293717/

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *markl* 
_We were promised the skeptics would have their own little kiddie pool, so they could be segregated away from the Cables forum. What is the status? Can we have this new forum soon?_

 

 Quote:


  Originally Posted by *wcmanus* 
_Mark, I can certainly appreciate why you started this thread, but as you've said, it has already been derailed and will soon become a complete nightmare to moderate so I'm going to close it after this post.

 Like you, I'm really sick of all of this thread crapping in the Cables forum (and elsewhere as well). While these same people will swear that their insistent prater should not be thought of as thread crapping (but rather, as a further attempt to enlighten the uninformed), it really does have destructive results. Thus, may their "spirited participation" in such threads be well intentioned or not (and I think more often than not, not), it always ends in the same way._


----------



## yotacowboy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *monolith* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_It's public in that anyone can join and express their opinions on matters audio, whatever they may be. Until such time as the user agreement stipulates you can't claim most cables sound the same or using blocks of hard wood to damp vibrations is nonsense, it'll continue being a public forum with respect to audio opinions.

 If you want to get into semantics about being able to say *anything*, then there basically aren't any public forums anywhere, because just about anywhere in the world there's something you can say that'll get you jailed or banned, etc._

 

Don't confuse public with democratic.


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_*So how is headfi public again?*_

 


 Well, let's look at the definition of "public":

  Quote:


 pub·lic /ˈpʌblɪk/ –adjective
*1.of, pertaining to, or affecting a population or a community as a whole: public funds; a public nuisance.*
 2.done, made, acting, etc., for the community as a whole: public prosecution.
 3.open to all persons: a public meeting.
 4.of, pertaining to, or being in the service of a community or nation, esp. as a government officer: a public official.
 5.maintained at the public expense and under public control: a public library; a public road.
 6.generally known: The fact became public.
 7.familiar to the public; prominent: public figures.
*8.open to the view of all; existing or conducted in public: a public dispute.*
*9.pertaining or devoted to the welfare or well-being of the community: public spirit.*
 10.of or pertaining to all humankind; universal.
 –noun
 11.the people constituting a *community*, state, or nation.
*12.a particular group of people with a common interest, aim, etc.: the book-buying public.* 
 

You argue, essentially, that Head-Fi is not a public forum because it doesn't fall within definition 5, and perhaps definition 3. At a minimum, Head-Fi clearly falls within definitions 1, 8, 9, 11 and 12.


----------



## Vul Kuolun

Thanks, Febs.


----------



## dazzer1975

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* 
_Now I'm totally confused. What does markl's post on page 1 of this thread, which I've now read for at least the 3rd time, have to do with me? How did I supposedly "applaud" this? My posts (#60 and #64 in this thread) related only to markl's debate with Sovkiller, which had to do with some of his subsequent posts. 

 I agreed with markl that if his cable reviews were to be considered rubbish, then it must also be true that his favorable reviews of RudiStor amps must also be rubbish. I happen to think that neither his cable reviews or his amp reviews are rubbish, but I thought his manner of expression (by using the RudiStor example) was spot on. In other words, if someone was going to hit him below the belt, then he might as well come back with something that will hurt just as much. Of course, he was merely being dramatic to make a point, but I thought it was a quite effective mode of argumentation. That's all. 

 But even in his post on the first page, which I've yet to respond to, I still don't see anything about a kiddy pool._

 

I never said you did applaud the post or that it contained the term "kiddy pool" I am smply pointing out the nature of the post which set the tone for the rest of the "debate" (while accepting my ownresponsibility in that too as my first few comments could have been more tempered) I said perhaps turning a blind eye to one faction because they share similiar views isn't helpful in the big scheme of things.

 The points with relation this whole thread I made in the post you quoted, and I am saying a balanced approach and an acknowledgment that attacks come from either side of the debatewould probably do much to help bring boh sides together.
 However, I am not sure that is possible with all the good intentions in the world, after reading (and contributing) to this.

 Being receptive to other opinions, PROVIDED they are framed in a respectful maner would be the best solution surely?


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Well, let's look at the definition of "public":



 You argue, essentially, that Head-Fi is not a public forum because it doesn't fall within definition 5, and perhaps definition 3. At a minimum, Head-Fi clearly falls within definitions 1, 8, 9, 11 and 12._

 

stop being such a formalist and textualist; put on your realist hat for once. I don't need to tell you what it means to be 'a public place'; I am sure you know the scope via the 1st amendment.

 Feels like butting head against Antonin Scalia - 'if you look up xyz in the dictionary, you will find...'

 The issue here is not public per se, it's "public place"; as in Headfi is not a public place, but a private place with certain public place characterstics. And please address my arguments in its totality and not cherry pick any one point you want to argue against.


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_stop being such a formalist and textualist; put on your realist hat for once._

 

What an ironic response.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I don't need to tell you what it means to be 'a public place'; I am sure you know the scope via the 1st amendment.

 Feels like butting head against Antonin Scalia - 'if you look up xyz in the dictionary, you will find...'

 The issue is not public per se, it's "public place" as in Headfi is not a public place. And please address my arguments in its totality and not cherry pick any one point you want to argue against._

 

I answered the specific question that you asked. I'm sorry if the answer upset you.

 Yes, I am familiar with the scope of the definition of "public place" as it is defined in the context of United States Constitutional jurisprudence. But you did not raise the point in the context of whether First Amendment rights to freedom of expression at are issue here. You raised in the context of a discussion regarding whether Head-Fi is more akin to a private conversation at a party or a public conversation. In that context, notwithstanding how Mr. Justice Scalia may have analyzed the question in the First Amendment context, the colloquial definition is more appropriate.


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I answered the specific question that you asked. I'm sorry if the answer upset you.

 Yes, I am familiar with the scope of the definition of "public place" as it is defined in the context of United States Constitutional jurisprudence. But you did not raise the point in the context of whether First Amendment rights to freedom of expression at are issue here. You raised in the context of a discussion regarding whether Head-Fi is more akin to a private conversation at a party or a public conversation. In that context, notwithstanding how Mr. Justice Scalia may have analyzed the question in the First Amendment context, the colloquial definition is more appropriate._

 

"colloquial definition is more appropriate" because you said so?

 "You raised in the context of a discussion regarding whether Head-Fi is more akin to a private conversation at a party or a public conversation." 
 No. you missed the distinction between the private vs public property.


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_"colloquial definition is more appropriate" because you said so?_

 

No, the colloquial definition is more appropriate for the reason that I gave in my post: you are using a definition that arises in the context of a First Amendment analysis, and this is not a First Amendment analysis.

  Quote:


 No. you missed the distinction between the private vs public property. 
 

I understand that you've argued that the ability to post at Head-Fi is a privilege, and not a right[1] because Head-Fi is privately owned and the staff has the ability to make rules that posters are required to follow. But you've also argued that discussions on Head-Fi are the equivalent of a private conversation held in someone's back yard, and for that reason, those discussions are more private than public. I disagree. Indeed, you yourself have conceded that the "public has the right to view, but not participate" in those discussions, and that alone makes this a public forum in the common definition of that term "open to the view of all; existing or conducted in public." 

 If the conversations here at Head-Fi were private conversations, why would it be necessary to have a "private message" system that is separate from the main forum messages? The answer is because the purpose of the main forum is to have conversations that are available to the public to read and, subject to certain conditions, participate in. Thus, the "backyard conversation" analogy fails.

 ___________________
 [1]When you're taking the bar exam, the answer "it is a right not a privilege" is never the correct answer. Seriously--they'll tell you that in your bar review course.


----------



## Arainach

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_"colloquial definition is more appropriate" because you said so?

 "You raised in the context of a discussion regarding whether Head-Fi is more akin to a private conversation at a party or a public conversation." 
 No. you missed the distinction between the private vs public property._

 

The distinction isn't as important as the effect. Your original claim was something like 'you can't say things I [cheesebert] don't like because it's a private place. The only sense in which Head-Fi is private is that *Jude* can forbid the discussion of whatever he thus pleases. He hasn't said anything of the sort in this thread, and no one else's opinion on the matter counts for anything. So, for all practical purposes, Head-Fi is a _public_ forum in the context of your argument.


----------



## UseName

You can find posts made on Head-Fi on google. I think that is makes the discussion public, regardless if it is held in a private arena. 

 I think the point in all this private vs public discussion is that if you are going to post your opinion, you may be analyized and picked apart by not only members of this forum, but also anyone who has access to the internet. 

 If you insist on calling it private, go ahead, but you are still at risk of being laughed at by anyone who can run a search in google. If you are that sensitive, perhaps you should not be posting at all.


----------



## Riboge

Black and white distinctions of many kinds have become problematic in our times. Alive vs. dead, fetus vs. human person, etc. The internet has brought into being a variety of transitional states between fully private and fully public. We see the problems with this when people treat emails at work, myspace, facebook, etc, as more private than they are since they are less public than shouting it from a street corner or because they are encouraged to think they are in some room in which only the other active participants are present. On the other hand, we are and wish to be to some degree a community which means there should be some degree of identity and shared history, familiarity and mutual good will of members, sense of inside the community and outside, etc. It is a pretty new thing to address a 'space' in which perhaps no one is listening or perhaps many more than apparent are, all with different attitudes and awareness of past discussions.

 Arguments based on a claim of distinction between antipodes and precedents based on one pole versus the other make little sense. What we have here is neither but has similarities to both. We have to work out anew what makes sense and what is appropriate given any particular set of events. That is what is happening here. It's hard to see how notions of rights and justice based on the old distinction can be decisive in this. And this reflects the folly of the underlying struggle over the antipodes of difference vs. no difference, subjective vs. objective, scientific vs. experiential. When you measure brain activity of someone listening to music thru one cable vs. another, is the data produced subjective or objective? Surely it is not objective when someone else reads the meters and subjective when the listener himself does, or objective when the meter is outside the listeners head and subjective when it's inside, another trained part of his brain. And so on.


----------



## UseName

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Riboge* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Black and white distinctions of many kinds have become problematic in our times. Alive vs. dead, fetus vs. human person, etc. The internet has brought into being a variety of transitional states between fully private and fully public. We see the problems with this when people treat emails at work, myspace, facebook, etc, as more private than they are since they are less public than shouting it from a street corner or because they are encouraged to think they are in some room in which only the other active participants are present. On the other hand, we are and wish to be to some degree a community which means there should be some degree of identity and shared history, familiarity and mutual good will of members, sense of inside the community and outside, etc. It is a pretty new thing to address a 'space' in which perhaps no one is listening or perhaps many more than apparent are, all with different attitudes and awareness of past discussions.

 Arguments based on a claim of distinction between antipodes and precedents based on one pole versus the other make little sense. What we have here is neither but has similarities to both. We have to work out anew what makes sense and what is appropriate given any particular set of events. That is what is happening here. It's hard to see how notions of rights and justice based on the old distinction can be decisive in this. And this reflects the folly of the underlying struggle over the antipodes of difference vs. no difference, subjective vs. objective, scientific vs. experiential. When you measure brain activity of someone listening to music thru one cable vs. another, is the data produced subjective or objective? Surely it is not objective when someone else reads the meters and subjective when the listener himself does, or objective when the meter is outside the listeners head and subjective when it's inside, another trained part of his brain. And so on._

 

I've never seen so many words say so little... forgive me, I appologize for not being as smart as you, what is the purpose of this mess?


----------



## slwiser

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *UseName* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I've never seen so many words say so little... forgive me, I appologize for not being as smart as you, what is the purpose of this mess?_

 

The purpose is to make an intelligent discussion but those efforts fail for some people.


----------



## 3x331m

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *UseName* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_what is the purpose of this mess?_

 

I just post 'cause I think I'm smarter than others...


----------



## UseName

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *slwiser* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The purpose is to make an intelligent discussion but those efforts fail for some people._

 

I can't tell if you are trying to insult me or Ribose... good one anyway. You burned one of us.... probably.


----------



## slwiser

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *UseName* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I can't tell if you are trying to insult me or Ribose... good one anyway. You burned one of us.... probably._

 

I did not quote Riboge....your comment reminded me of students that go to class having teachers that use the English language as a seond language and speak it relatively well only to use the teachers accent as a dodge for having to understand what is being taught.


----------



## UseName

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *slwiser* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I did not quote Riboge...._

 

Oh... hahah! You got him good. 

 I get it now.


----------



## Riboge

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *3x331m* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I just post 'cause I think I'm smarter than others... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			



_

 

In my case I think I might have something to offer and respect my fellow members enough to think they can understand complicated and difficult issues if articulated well enough. Maybe I didn't do well enough. If anyone wants to make efforts to understand comparable to the effort I put into trying to contribute something, please ask questions.

 How are we going to have substantive discussion when there is such a premium given to contemptuous but empty dismissals such as UseName's--who btw is publicly retaliating for my dismissing him in private(pm)?


----------



## bigshot

Perhaps we need separate forums for antipodes and precidents!

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## juniperlater

I am in the middle on this issue. Sometimes I think one cable sounds better than the other. I have come to accept that it might be "placebo" as one other head-fier claimed it could be, but I have begun making my own cables to at least keep costs under control.


----------



## sacd lover

I vote we close this thread. Nothing is being addressed; just more ill will.


----------



## Mher6

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *sacd lover* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I vote we close this thread. Nothing is being addressed; just more ill will._

 

Agreed. Furthermore, I think separate sub-forums for "belivers" and "skeptics" won't remedy the problem, but might lighten the flame bait posts.


----------



## bigshot

My grandfather used to say, "You can't love an inanimate object." He meant that emotions should be reserved for humans, not things. So it's pretty silly to hate wires. But when it comes right down to it, it's pretty silly to hate anyone. There are enough people in this world to enjoy to waste time focusing on hating the few people we don't get along with. I think some people in this thread need to spend less time bashing and battling and more time just enjoying life and the people around them. Talking about how to make your music sound better is a good start.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## UseName

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *sacd lover* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I vote we close this thread. Nothing is being addressed; just more ill will._

 

I agree. I've said almost all I want to about the subject. 

 I still think a listening impressions forum would give those that want to talk about how something 'sounds' without having to put up with people asking for DBTs, prove, ect. would resolve almost all the issues. 

 Mods, please think about it as an alternative... even tho you don't like me. 

 :grouphug:


----------



## markl

I always enjoy how my posts are often held to a higher standard than most, especially among the skeptic crowd. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Which is doubly ironic considering the tone, tactics and nature of the posts many of them who pretend to be outraged by my words use on a regular basis toward me, and who actually inspired those posts quoted herein in the first place. Like I've said now a thousand times, I reserve the right of any human being to respond in kind and call a spade a spade. Don't demand I show you more respect than you have shown me, it just doesn't work that way. 


*BTW, I am not now, nor have I ever been a moderator here.* 

 Oh, but if I was, the banning-for-life I would do. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I would clean up Dodge City here in an afternoon, believe me...


----------



## dazzer1975

This proves what about cables and furthers the debate how?

 It is more than evident where the source of animosity, aggression and flame bait resides.

 Just read through again with objective eyes forgetting what you believe for a moment and dcide for yourselves where the perpetuation of animosity is coming from.


----------



## jude

Please pardon that I haven't read through the 51 pages of this thread, but some Head-Fi'ers I have great respect for have suggested that closing this thread would be a good idea. Since I can't read the 51 pages at this time, I'll take them at their words.

 Best Regards,
 Jude


----------

