# Patrick's case: you guys mostly aren't acceptable!



## WindowsX

Though his actions are a bit outrage for being so dedicated to Valhalla...(or whatever its called). However, his rigs aren't that stupid to use those cables. He has cary 306, the good mid-end CD Player (or used to have), k1000 (so called one of great earspeaker), dac1 (so called famous dac unit under 1000) and Vahalla...lol.

 But what I see from you guys is he's crazy to spend 3k or more for cables, he's insane, blablabla... Gosh, I would hate to say it but these comments proved that most members in Head-fi are newbie against hi-fi rig. In home system, it's common stuff to use 3k or even 10k cables. They value everything equal, mostly 1:1 or 1:2 for cables: other thing.

 It's too damn unfair for patrick seeing these actions. Why? You have no problem if someone buy 6k headphones or amps but buying 3k for cables is "Oh my god! Are you crazy!?!"...What a joke. Go back to audiophile school and study again how important cables are for getting to hi-fi step.

 As for you, patrick, don't get so cocky with your valhalla. It's just good but not so great like godly ultimate stuff. Valhalla sucks for power cord and everyone who plays hi-fi system knows that. You should give it a try for Virtual Dynamics (Relevations or even Genesis) and Purist Audio Design (Anniversary) once for better and your CD Player needs to be updated. How about getting Esoteric X01 or X03 if you can afford? I'm sure it will beat your Cary 306 in every aspect (Cary is good for tube amp but not for CD Player)


----------



## vcoheda

i don't have enough income to experiment with high-end cables, but i don't doubt their effectiveness. browse through the audio setups on audiogon or other websites. the vast majority of them make even the most accomplished head-fi rig look like child's play. every one of those setups use very expensive cables. are they all just following the herd. or is it merely a certain symmetry at work. component a, b, c, and d all cost x, so e (the cable) must cost that as well. maybe. but i tend to think that these cables probably do sound better than most and make a difference. if i had the income, i would experiment with and explore better cables, but i don't and for now what i have sounds pretty good.


----------



## Jon118

Before this thread goes to hell and then gets locked, which is usually the direction that these go, you have to look at some of his claims. Yes the Valhalla is his main focus, but he tried brilliant pebbles, has some ridiculous mass dampening solutions, and many other bizarre "tweaks" that simply don't have much effect as far as common sense goes, I can't say they don't work since I haven't heard his rig, but I have my doubts. I don't think it is his devotion to the cables, but his tweaking and the other stuff he posts that makes people question him. That and the fact that he tears apart these expensive cables. That said I don't criticize him, I can think of better things to spend all that money on, but if that is what he wants to do and he thinks it works, then more power to him.

 Now with that out of the way, the Patrick haters and cable scientists who will give you a lot of numbers about conduction and such will come through to explain why they criticize him. But these threads never end well.


----------



## WindowsX

"Patrick, I don't have enough faith to believe in your propose." That's OK. No problem if you don't believe.

 "Patrick, you are insane, crazy, blablabla" That's unacceptable to say things like this.

 This isn't problem about believer or non-believer but respect or no respect.


----------



## Vul Kuolun

If you choose to put out 10k for "playing hifi system" (!), so be it. I guess, you and most of the other 10k guys get an aequivalent pay check every month.

 But tell me: Could you imagine spending "your life savings" on some stupid cables and slice them up? Ever took a look at his appartement?
 This guy is ruining himself, and it's a shame this forum funktions as a platform for his obviously sickly self-portrayal and guys like you encourage him. This is irresponsible.

 If i was a mod here, i'd delete this thread right now, as it's the reason why he's acting like he does imho.


----------



## meat01

Quote:


 In home system, it's common stuff to use 3k or even 10k cables. 
 

Common for who? Most people do not spend more than $100 on cables, let alone $1000. You, Patrick and a few others are the exceptions. It is your money and you are welcome to spend it as you please, but I would hardly say $3000 worth of cables is common, even amongst people here at Head-Fi.

 I also know very few people here who have spent as much money on ERS paper as Patrick has.


----------



## WindowsX

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_"Patrick, I don't have enough faith to believe in your propose." That's OK. No problem if you don't believe.

 "Patrick, you are insane, crazy, blablabla" That's unacceptable to say things like this.

 This isn't problem about believer or non-believer but respect or no respect._

 

[size=xx-large]*READ*[/size]

 P.S. Treating Patrick or some exceptions as stupid for spending 1k for cables is the same for non head-fier who treats you guys as stupid to spend a lot of money just for listening to music. You guys sure has reasons for those non head-fier as patrick has his reasons to you guys as well. And do you guys can accept that those non head-fiers call you "stupid" just to waste over hundreds or thousands for listening to music?


----------



## SilverTrumpet999

I work in a nuclear physics lab, operating and experimenting with a particle accelerator. Our detectors transmit analog signals, which are preamplified at the detectors and then the signal is carried to our acquisition computers.

 An good quality Si(Li) X-ray detector costs in the range of ~20k. What cables do we use to carry these signals? Shielded BNC's that cost less than $50 / 12'. I have personally tested these cables with bench meters, oscilloscopes, etc. We even have some more expensive cabling around - which tests no different.

 I do believe that RatShack cables can be improved upon, but the absolute top end for cabling for me will be BJC. Studios use these; the music you are listening to may well have been mixed using BJC interconnects. They have the $$ to afford more, so why don't they? 

 I think this entire thing is psychological once you reach the equivalent of BJC.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Though his actions are a bit outrage for being so dedicated to Valhalla...(or whatever its called). However, his rigs aren't that stupid to use those cables. He has cary 306, the good mid-end CD Player (or used to have), k1000 (so called one of great earspeaker), dac1 (so called famous dac unit under 1000) and Vahalla...lol.

 But what I see from you guys is he's crazy to spend 3k or more for cables, he's insane, blablabla... Gosh, I would hate to say it but these comments proved that most members in Head-fi are newbie against hi-fi rig. In home system, it's common stuff to use 3k or even 10k cables. They value everything equal, mostly 1:1 or 1:2 for cables: other thing.

 It's too damn unfair for patrick seeing these actions. Why? You have no problem if someone buy 6k headphones or amps but buying 3k for cables is "Oh my god! Are you crazy!?!"...What a joke. Go back to audiophile school and study again how important cables are for getting to hi-fi step.

 As for you, patrick, don't get so cocky with your valhalla. It's just good but not so great like godly ultimate stuff. Valhalla sucks for power cord and everyone who plays hi-fi system knows that. You should give it a try for Virtual Dynamics (Relevations or even Genesis) and Purist Audio Design (Anniversary) once for better and your CD Player needs to be updated. How about getting Esoteric X01 or X03 if you can afford? I'm sure it will beat your Cary 306 in every aspect (Cary is good for tube amp but not for CD Player)_

 

Hi,

 of course you are entitled to your own opinion and patrick to his.

 He tried probably more then you ever will, so for him this cable is the best in his sytem. For you, it's another cable.

 Remind that Nordost cables, especially in the reference series of cables are very revealing and NOT for everybody. If the rig is right and in balance(read: of high quality) then these cables will shine and grow to the sky with your rig. They are NOT the link that is holding the rig back, instead reveal everything your rig does downstream. Not everybody's cup of tea.

 There are more really good cables, in the end, it's just a preference and how they perform in your rig.

 Up till now, my Nordost IC is the best i've had and heard so far!
 I have no intention to replace it.

 I read another brand 9000 dollar IC is just as good and neutral, costing 3 times more, go figure.

 But hey, you know they have a new 18.000 dollar cable, so this might be better then anything else thus far.

 Remember Nik, also a very respected member on headfi that also tried everything possible, even commissioned custom amps for his headphone rig costing way over 10.000 dollars just for the amp and his linn sondek 12 cdplayer, wich is still in a league of it's own!

 Guess what, after those expensive adventures, he settled down with the hd650/k1000, a midprice amp(still a couple of thousand dollars) and the linn sondek (15.000 dollars). To his ears, this set up sound most lifelike. Remember that he is a musician as well! And has experience in recording studio's, so he should know something about sound!

 If you mod a fairly priced component, it can get you there for a very decent price And you'll be up to the big boys!

 Buying expensive stuff, doesn't guarantee the best overall sound at all, carefully matching, as it seems, is even more important.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *SilverTrumpet999* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I work in a nuclear physics lab, operating and experimenting with a particle accelerator. Our detectors transmit analog signals, which are preamplified at the detectors and then the signal is carried to our acquisition computers.

 An good quality Si(Li) X-ray detector costs in the range of ~20k. What cables do we use to carry these signals? Shielded BNC's that cost less than $50 / 12'. I have personally tested these cables with bench meters, oscilloscopes, etc. We even have some more expensive cabling around - which tests no different.

 I do believe that RatShack cables can be improved upon, but the absolute top end for cabling for me will be BJC. Studios use these; the music you are listening to may well have been mixed using BJC interconnects. They have the $$ to afford more, so why don't they? 

 I think this entire thing is psychological once you reach the equivalent of BJC._

 

Great story, only the problem is that the 20.000 dollar device isn't made for musical reproduction! Any decent 50 dollar cable will let that device do it's job where it was intended for, simple as that. But it will NOT make a good amp shine.


----------



## Zorander

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Though his actions are a bit outrage for being so dedicated to Valhalla...(or whatever its called). However, his rigs aren't that stupid to use those cables. He has cary 306, the good mid-end CD Player (or used to have), k1000 (so called one of great earspeaker), dac1 (so called famous dac unit under 1000) and Vahalla...lol.

 But what I see from you guys is he's crazy to spend 3k or more for cables, he's insane, blablabla... Gosh, I would hate to say it but these comments proved that most members in Head-fi are newbie against hi-fi rig. In home system, it's common stuff to use 3k or even 10k cables. They value everything equal, mostly 1:1 or 1:2 for cables: other thing.

 It's too damn unfair for patrick seeing these actions. Why? You have no problem if someone buy 6k headphones or amps but buying 3k for cables is "Oh my god! Are you crazy!?!"...What a joke. Go back to *audiophile school* and study again how important cables are for getting to hi-fi step.

 As for you, patrick, don't get so cocky with your valhalla. It's just good but not so great like godly ultimate stuff. Valhalla sucks for power cord and everyone who plays hi-fi system knows that. You should give it a try for Virtual Dynamics (Relevations or even Genesis) and Purist Audio Design (Anniversary) once for better and your CD Player needs to be updated. How about getting Esoteric X01 or X03 if you can afford? I'm sure it will beat your Cary 306 in every aspect (Cary is good for tube amp but not for CD Player)_

 

Now we have a dedicated school for this?!? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	







 And seriously, given the relative cost of material for cables vs. source/amp/transducer, I personally find it crazy and unacceptable to justify putting cables on the same cost level as the other components. Having heard $200+ cables and quantifying the difference they made, I never found the _difference_ in sound (not necessarily an improvement) worth the price. I do not believe $10K+ cables will be any better in terms of value.

 Regards.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *meat01* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Common for who? Most people do not spend more than $100 on cables, let alone $1000. You, Patrick and a few others are the exceptions. It is your money and you are welcome to spend it as you please, but I would hardly say $3000 worth of cables is common, even amongst people here at Head-Fi.

 I also know very few people here who have spent as much money on ERS paper as Patrick has._

 

Yes, there are exensive setups sold now and then, only they won't talk about it on headfi. Remember that most good speakers setups easally surpass a good headphone rig in price!


----------



## WindowsX

So you guys have no idea what this topic is for after all. read my earlier posts again and stop treating guys who are cables believer are idiot, bs, or whatever like before.

 As for power cord cables, there's a big difference between normal cables and high-end cables. Being unable to distinguish between normal cables and stock cables doesn't mean you can apply the same rule to high-end cables.


----------



## meat01

Quote:


 But it will NOT make a good amp shine. 
 

Nor will a $3000 cable, which is just transferring the signal it is given good or bad. You can't polish a turd!


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_"Patrick, I don't have enough faith to believe in your propose." That's OK. No problem if you don't believe.

 "Patrick, you are insane, crazy, blablabla" That's unacceptable to say things like this.

 This isn't problem about believer or non-believer but respect or no respect._

 

I agree; it's his hobby, his money and his opinion, like anybody else's opinion!

 Nobody would attack anybody for buying an expensive exotic car costing 500.000 dollars, but if somebody is buying any decent cabling, he is called any name possible! This still seems not accepted!

 Alot of you people out there could learn something from him; alot of things concur with what i found out after extensive experimenting and listening to Cables, IC's etc.

 Instead of reading sites and blab as they do, try and experiment for yourself and you'll know! A piece of wire doesn't have to cost much, so these experiments wouldn't cost you an arm and a legg, but will give you some insites.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *meat01* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Nor will a $3000 cable, which is just transferring the signal it is given good or bad. You can't polish a turd!_

 

You never tried or even heard one. period.

 So, you're not the one that knows!


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_So you guys have no idea what this topic is for after all. read my earlier posts again and stop treating guys who are cables believer are idiot, bs, or whatever like before.

 As for power cord cables, there's a big difference between normal cables and high-end cables. Being unable to distinguish between normal cables and stock cables doesn't mean you can apply the same rule to high-end cables._

 

Believe me, in some cases, as in mine, it is really like night and day! As much improvement as good or high end components would give!

 The only problem is, in the audio industry they can ask what they think is right for the quality they are selling.

 On a rig of 50.000 or 100.000 dollars, 10.000 for cabling isn't insane, as a matter affect more a necessaty to make the rig perform it should!

 In 25 years, i've never seen or heard any high end rig being cabled with radio shack cables, only with high end cables, so there must be a reason for it, and know very well why for sure. As some other people do that experiment and listen to all sorts of cables.


----------



## fwojciec

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_As for you, patrick, don't get so cocky with your valhalla._

 

 Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_"Patrick, you are insane, crazy, blablabla" That's unacceptable to say things like this._

 

 Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_[size=xx-large]*READ*[/size]_

 

 Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_So you guys have no idea what this topic is for after all. read my earlier posts again (...)_

 

Yes, I agree, they are an unruly bunch. Since, apparently, imperatives are not cutting it anymore, I say just get yourself a whip and whip them into submission!


----------



## rb67

Man someone's letting off some steam! O_O

 Cables have always been a controversial subject in audio. Being aggressive towards both sides really doesn't get anyone anywhere...


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *SilverTrumpet999* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I work in a nuclear physics lab, operating and experimenting with a particle accelerator. Our detectors transmit analog signals, which are preamplified at the detectors and then the signal is carried to our acquisition computers.

 An good quality Si(Li) X-ray detector costs in the range of ~20k. What cables do we use to carry these signals? Shielded BNC's that cost less than $50 / 12'. I have personally tested these cables with bench meters, oscilloscopes, etc. We even have some more expensive cabling around - which tests no different.

 I do believe that RatShack cables can be improved upon, but the absolute top end for cabling for me will be BJC. Studios use these; the music you are listening to may well have been mixed using BJC interconnects. They have the $$ to afford more, so why don't they? 

 I think this entire thing is psychological once you reach the equivalent of BJC._

 

Simply because a studio wants to make money, like any other business. They are not really audio lovers that try to get the best sound out of their rigs.

 Not every musician is using a stradivarius!

 I read about a sound engeneer constructing his own cabling for his studio and other studio's, these cables cost literally thousands of dollars a piece!

 You cannot deny that not every recording sounds the same!
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 So, the scientists, the recording engeneers and the audio lovers on head-fi cannot agree upon.

 Just use whatever you can afford or think gives you the best sound.

 Most people just share *their* experience with their cables, equipment or rigs! It has to be red as such, their opinion.

 You don't have to get *personal*, if you don't agree with someone!


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rb67* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Man someone's letting off some steam! O_O

 Cables have always been a controversial subject in audio. Being aggressive towards both sides really doesn't get anyone anywhere..._

 

As is high end in general.


----------



## Dr.Love

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_There are more really good cables, in the end, it's just a preference and how they perform in your rig._

 

I agree with this. Everyone has their preferences and if everyone liked the same anything how boring would that be?


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Simply because a studio wants to make money, like any other business. They are not really audio lovers that try to get the best sound out of their rigs.

 Not every musician is using a stradivarius!

 I read about a sound engeneer constructing his own cabling for his studio and other studio's, these cables cost literally thousands of dollars a piece!

 You cannot deny that not every recording sounds the same!
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 So, the scientists, the recording engeneers and the audio lovers on head-fi cannot agree upon.

 Just use whatever you can afford or think gives you the best sound.

 Most people just share *their* experience with their cables, equipment or rigs! It has to be red as such, their opinion.

 You don't have to get *personal*, if you don't agree with someone!_

 

 Quote:


  Originally Posted by *SilverTrumpet999* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I work in a nuclear physics lab, operating and experimenting with a particle accelerator. Our detectors transmit analog signals, which are preamplified at the detectors and then the signal is carried to our acquisition computers.

 An good quality Si(Li) X-ray detector costs in the range of ~20k. What cables do we use to carry these signals? Shielded BNC's that cost less than $50 / 12'. I have personally tested these cables with bench meters, oscilloscopes, etc. We even have some more expensive cabling around - which tests no different.

 I do believe that RatShack cables can be improved upon, but the absolute top end for cabling for me will be BJC. Studios use these; the music you are listening to may well have been mixed using BJC interconnects. They have the $$ to afford more, so why don't they? 

 I think this entire thing is psychological once you reach the equivalent of BJC._

 

You should go to your local audio dealer and ask them for a set of nice/expensive cable for demo (the store closest to your school is a dealer for Audio Quest and Valhalla cables 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Most will let you use it for a week or two. If you hear a difference, maybe you can figure out why there is a difference and improve the current way of measuring cable; you will be doing the audiophile community a great service.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You should go to your local audio dealer and ask them for a set of nice/expensive cable for demo (the store closest to your school is a dealer for Audio Quest and Valhalla cables 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Most will let you use it for a week or two. If you hear a difference, maybe you can figure out why there is a difference and improve the current way of measuring cable; you will be doing the audiophile community a great service._

 

One of the reasons cables sound the way they do is the use of different dielectrics! This cannot be measured.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 And i've done 25 years of testing and listening to cables, i know what's on the market and what's good for the money.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Some scientists did but sceptics won't accept it and still use the term "Inaudible".

 Me, i just trust what i hear through my ears and brain. If it sounds good to me, then it sounds good. It doesn't mean someone else can't have another opinion about it. In the end, as i said earlier, just buy or use what you think sounds best or can afford.

 I know, there's a huge difference between cables, especially between very cheap and high end cables.

 If you don't think so, then just don't spend the time discussing about it, or the money on it. Simple as that.

 Oh, buy the way, i happen to have owned an old high end audioquest silver cable; the Nordost sounds much better!


----------



## earwicker7

God, I'm tempted not to jump into this, but I have to put this notion to rest.

 It's some form of "If cables are so awesome, why don't the pros use them?"

 This is nonsense. Has anyone who says this ever been to a NICE studio? Not the average "My garage band wants to cut a demo tape" studio, but a professional, top of the line studio? They absolutely do use this stuff.

 I've been in a couple. Yes, they are not the rule but the exception, but they were by far the nicest studios I've been to.

 Also, this is a bit of proof that I'm not just blowing hot air--http://shunyata.com/Content/clientlist-RecIndustry.html.


----------



## stevenkelby

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *SilverTrumpet999* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I work in a nuclear physics lab, operating and experimenting with a particle accelerator._

 

Yeah how does it sound? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 It's naive to assume that we already know everything that can be known. I'm referring to the fact that some people assume that because two different cables measure identically, they will sound identical. It's logical to me that there may be things which we can not measure now. If we already know everything that can be known, even in just one field, like cable measurement, isn't science finished, completed?


----------



## Dr.Love

For me cables make a difference. For those who they don't, all the better, that much more money in your pocket. Either way it's all good.


----------



## Icarium

You guys do realize that not only does WindowsX believe in cables (Something I believe in myself), but he advocates and supports spending more on cables than on the rest of your rig (Source/Amp/Headphones). 

 I quote him from his previous thread:
 "I can say with confidence that 1600$ amp + 2400$ cables gives better sound than 3000$ amp + 400$ cables in terms of hi-fi sound."

 from http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showpo...40&postcount=9

 I'm not going to say he's insane... but I'd love if he recognized that his opinion is just HIS opinion and not some sort of truth that the rest of us are blind to.


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Icarium* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You guys do realize that not only does WindowsX believe in cables (Something I believe in myself), but he advocates and supports spending more on cables than on the rest of your rig (Source/Amp/Headphones). 

 I quote him from his previous thread:
 "I can say with confidence that 1600$ amp + 2400$ cables gives better sound than 3000$ amp + 400$ cables in terms of hi-fi sound."

 from http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showpo...40&postcount=9

 I'm not going to say he's insane... but I'd love if he recognized that his opinion is just HIS opinion and not some sort of truth that the rest of us are blind to._

 

so basically what we really need to do is to spend $100,000 on our audio system so that $10,000 on cables would look more in line with % spent on system vs % spent on cables. 

 Actually $100k doesn't go very far 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 ..... 40k for spkr, 20k for amp, 10k for preamp, 20k for CDP, and 10k on cable. ....lol..I sure know how to spend money 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 ..what a plan!


----------



## Icarium

Meh, I personally advocate whatever works for you. I've heard expensive power cords before and stock power cords and Signal Cable power cords (Medium priced) and Quail/Iron Lung Jelly fish power cords. 

 What I've noticed is the difference from stock computer power cords -> Quail/Signal Cable Magic Reference was very noticeable. The difference between those power cords -> ones 10x did not match the scale up from stock to budget audiophile power cords. There was some refinement but it was like a 00.1% thing for me. However, I am not going to blindly rule out the possibility that there are companies out there that sell a 3-5 figure power cord that is actually worth the money spent. Maybe there is maybe there isn't. Maybe there is some sound science backing it up (Doubtful), and maybe it just sounds that frickin awesome. I will be receiving a final prototype of a $1,000 power cord soon from a cable seller that is popular on this forums that is the product of 2 years of research... and we'll see if it can convince me in a way that Virtual Dynamics and Analysis Plus have failed to do. If anything can this power cord may be that one ;p

 And moreover its undoubtedly more than a little rig dependent. Sure I've noticed the drastic improvements from stock -> signal cable magic reference in 4 different rigs from mine (Electrostatic/Dynamic and Solid State/Tubes)... 

 Also my take on interconnects. Money/Quality matters a lot more for RCA than XLR. I've heard 4 XLR to XLR in the low hundreds to the mid hundreds and they really have very minor differences. It was not nearly as subtle with RCA to RCA, but still relatively subtle compared to source/amp/headphone changes for me. Also, I mean if you are going to be spending 500+ on interconnects I would really suggest considering hardwiring if you don't move your rig much. This is again something that Patrick does that should have a non-slight positive effect. Patrick isn't 100 percent BS imo. But obviously take anything he says with a large grain of salt, but as with anything I try and keep an open mind and someday perhaps I will apply the ones that make sense to me (Probably in a safer more controlled manner) to me (Cage Mod/Hardwiring).


----------



## vcoheda

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Icarium* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I will be receiving a final prototype of a $1,000 power cord soon from a cable seller that is popular on this forums that is the product of 2 years of research... and we'll see if it can convince me in a way that Virtual Dynamics and Analysis Plus have failed to do. If anything can this power cord may be that one._

 

that's interesting.

 guess we'll just have to wait to see who it is. when is this mystery power cord supposed to arrive.


----------



## Icarium

I'm not sure. Probably within the next month. I think its been complete for at least several days to a week, but needs to undergone testing and possibly burn in or whatever and also the rest of the things I am getting from him (Modded HD600s supposedly to improve them greatly also supposed to be doable for HD580s/650s) and some other cables have to be completed as well so I can grab it all in a package. 

 I'll do a pretty indepth review and do some blind and non-blind shoot outs with power cords from the cheap/stock computer type to the 5 digit Virtual Dynamics Genesis Power Cord that Neilvg. Thankfully the California Bay Area has one of the highest concentrations of a large variety of gear from the cheap to the ridiculous/tube/solid state/diy/dynamic and electrostatic. 

 As for the HD6X0 mod. I don't actually really buy into these mods myself currently... I can understand a cable replacement, but mods I can only see as a zero-sum tweak. At best you change the character/signature of a headphone to get an equal but different flavor out of the headphone and at worst you get something that just sucks and is irreversible. That's my view and it'd have to be pretty frickin amazing a mod that blows me away on all levels to impress me 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 Edit: Oh, got permission. Yeah it's [AK]Zip's stuff.

 Here's a picture about the finished cable:
http://apuresound.com/pc/ Custom upgraded terminations available of course but the ones on right now are quite good, but personally I'll probably max them out a bit if I get mine. Oval topology.

 Also big announcement of [AK]Zip's regarding his Apuresound line tomorrow.


----------



## vcoheda

looking forward to that thread.

 you certainly have come a long way in a very short time.


----------



## Akathisia

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *earwicker7* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_God, I'm tempted not to jump into this, but I have to put this notion to rest.

 It's some form of "If cables are so awesome, why don't the pros use them?"

 This is nonsense. Has anyone who says this ever been to a NICE studio? Not the average "My garage band wants to cut a demo tape" studio, but a professional, top of the line studio? They absolutely do use this stuff.

 I've been in a couple. Yes, they are not the rule but the exception, but they were by far the nicest studios I've been to.

 Also, this is a bit of proof that I'm not just blowing hot air--http://shunyata.com/Content/clientlist-RecIndustry.html._

 

Excellent link.


----------



## LawnGnome

Since this thread is about patrick,

 If you think people call patrick insane because of his cables, you are wrong. We call him insane because of the dozens of absurd videos he posts here, and his obsessive compulsiveness, and complete lack of rationality.

 As for the cable side, give proof, or you have nothing, and since over all these years, not a single blind tests has come about to support, you have nothing.


----------



## Black Stuart

As Akathisia brought up studios,
 I thought I'd drop this in on this thread. My lady likes to listen to BBC radio 2 on a Sunday and Johnnie Walker was interviewing Mark Knopler.

 Apart from it being a very interesting dialogue, Mark let everyone know in no uncertain terms that, though he was "twenty years late, I at last have my own studio and it's really two studios in one. I have the digital thing but what I love is my analogue recording gear".

 He made a point of mentioning that he had 'rescued' all the old gear, which he had to hunt down. He really went to town over this analogue stuff. This can only be good news because a lot of young people will listen to what he has to say and he was so emphatic.

 It was quite obvious that the construction of his studio was a 'hands on affair'. 

 You can bet he did'nt use just any old cables.


----------



## Agnostic

1. Saying you heard a difference between two cables doesn't prove anything. The human perception of sound is not an accurate measuring instrument for factual differences, especially the more subtle ones. 

 2. Measuring, double blind testing and viable, testable theories will tell you if something is a fact or might reasonably be assumed to be a fact. The rest is just voodoo and superstition.

 3. Everyone is free to embrace voodoo and superstition. Just don't expect me to take it seriously.


----------



## WindowsX

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Icarium* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You guys do realize that not only does WindowsX believe in cables (Something I believe in myself), but he advocates and supports spending more on cables than on the rest of your rig (Source/Amp/Headphones). 

 I quote him from his previous thread:
 "I can say with confidence that 1600$ amp + 2400$ cables gives better sound than 3000$ amp + 400$ cables in terms of hi-fi sound."

 from http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showpo...40&postcount=9

 I'm not going to say he's insane... but I'd love if he recognized that his opinion is just HIS opinion and not some sort of truth that the rest of us are blind to._

 

There we go! Another silly quote to attack someone. If you guys read carefully above, you'll see why I posted it just because some fools who want to say cable is stupid.


----------



## Wmcmanus

With Patrick, it's not about the Valhalla cables or the ERS paper or whatever tweek he's going on about at the moment. It's about the attention that this supposedly 'extreme' behaviour brings. He's starved for attention and goes from one audio site to another to get it by coming across as increasingly wierd, out of tough with reality, and whacked out as a mad scientist who 'lives' for this stuff. 

 Seems to me what he really lives for is the attention. That's what his bizarre movies about ERS paper with hushed whispers are all about. It's all for the "look at me, I'm the extreme tweeker" effect. Same goes for his replies to the criticism that he gets. The more criticism the better because that gives him further opportunities to show us how "into" his tweeking habit he is (or he wants us to think he is). He plays the criticism off by pretending that he doesn't understand what people find so odd about his behaviour.

 If nobody paid attention to him, he would quickly go away and quit spending his money of these things. He would end up buying an 'extreme' pair of cowboy boots or toothpick holders instead, wherever he could find an online audience because he hasn't built a life for himself away from his keyboard.

 That's my take on it. Notice that he doesn't respond to very many threads that he didn't start himself and that he never starts a thread that isn't about himself.

 I suppose I should be sorry for being so direct, but sometimes you've just got to say what you've got to say. I don't have any problem with Patrick and do believe, at least to an extent, that he believes in what he is saying. But I think that over time, the "what" parts of what he's saying have become completely secondary to the "me" parts of the messages he's converying. It's not about the tweeks, it's about him, and that's fine. It's a free world afterall.


----------



## rhymesgalore

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_*With Patrick, it's not about the Valhalla cables or the ERS paper or whatever tweek he's going on about at the moment. It's about the attention that this supposedly 'extreme' behaviour brings. He's starved for attention and goes from one audio site to another to get it by coming across as increasingly wierd, out of tough with reality, and whacked out as a mad scientist who 'lives' for this stuff. 

 Seems to me what he really lives for is the attention. That's what his bizarre movies about ERS paper with hushed whispers are all about. It's all for the "look at me, I'm the extreme tweeker" effect. Same goes for his replies to the criticism that he gets. The more criticism the better because that gives him further opportunities to show us how "into" his tweeking habit he is (or he wants us to think he is). He plays the criticism off by pretending that he doesn't understand what people find so odd about his behaviour.

 If nobody paid attention to him, he would quickly go away and quit spending his money of these things. He would end up buying an 'extreme' pair of cowboy boots or toothpick holders instead, wherever he could find an online audience because he hasn't built a life for himself away from his keyboard.*

 That's my take on it. Notice that he doesn't respond to very many threads that he didn't start himself and that he never starts a thread that isn't about himself.

 I suppose I should be sorry for being so direct, but sometimes you've just got to say what you've got to say. I don't have any problem with Patrick and do believe, at least to an extent, that he believes in what he is saying. But I think that over time, the "what" parts of what he's saying have become completely secondary to the "me" parts of the messages he's converying. It's not about the tweeks, it's about him, and that's fine. It's a free world afterall._

 

Exactly my thoughts.


----------



## Patrick82

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_If nobody paid attention to him, he would quickly go away and quit spending his money of these things._

 

If I liked attention more than proper audio quality I would blow up my audio system on video.

 If I wanted attention I would share all 3 megabytes of my private audio logs. Then I would print them on paper and go out on the city streets naked with a megaphone and giving away my logs to random people. 
 I can figure out something even more extreme if I really wanted it.

 If nobody responded to any of my posts I would still keep posting because I want to share the truth about the audio tweaks. I post in many forums because I don't want the knowledge to get lost when someone decides to delete it.


----------



## Agnostic

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Patrick82* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_If nobody responded to any of my posts I would still keep posting because I want to share the truth about the audio tweaks. I post in many forums because I don't want the knowledge to get lost when someone decides to delete it._

 

Sounds just a _*tad*_ messianic to me...


----------



## stevenkelby

I like Patrick. I've never found his posts offensive. He speaks his mind bravely and isn't scared of all the abuse he gets. The content of his posts is another topic, but I'm glad there are people like Patrick around to offer an alternative type of character.


----------



## Patrick82

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Agnostic* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Sounds just a *tad* messianic to me..._

 

If skeptic would become a moderator in a forum he would delete all the cable threads because he thinks cables don't make a difference. Then for many hundreds of years the audiophiles will be using stock cables in their systems and they don't know what they are missing.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Agnostic* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_1. Saying you heard a difference between two cables doesn't prove anything. The human perception of sound is not an accurate measuring instrument for factual differences, especially the more subtle ones. 

 2. Measuring, double blind testing and viable, testable theories will tell you if something is a fact or might reasonably be assumed to be a fact. The rest is just voodoo and superstition.

 3. Everyone is free to embrace voodoo and superstition. Just don't expect me to take it seriously._

 

Typical a quote of somebody who actually never experimented with cables or listened to high end cables himself.

 As some scientists proof, conductor is important, dielectric is important. But all you guys say; it's not audible, right.


 If you cannot run the 100 meters in 9.74, it doesn't mean nobody else can!

 saying you don't hear a difference doesn't proof anything for me.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Black Stuart* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_As Akathisia brought up studios,
 I thought I'd drop this in on this thread. My lady likes to listen to BBC radio 2 on a Sunday and Johnnie Walker was interviewing Mark Knopler.

 Apart from it being a very interesting dialogue, Mark let everyone know in no uncertain terms that, though he was "twenty years late, I at last have my own studio and it's really two studios in one. I have the digital thing but what I love is my analogue recording gear".

 He made a point of mentioning that he had 'rescued' all the old gear, which he had to hunt down. He really went to town over this analogue stuff. This can only be good news because a lot of young people will listen to what he has to say and he was so emphatic.

 It was quite obvious that the construction of his studio was a 'hands on affair'. 

 You can bet he did'nt use just any old cables._

 

Not only mark knopfler, also other pro musicians still rave about the good old analogue times.

 I also have an Elvis record, wich was recorded in those days on rca tube gear, it still sounds darn good! Even the engeneers who remastered the tracks were impressed with the quality. They said they hardly had to touch up anything.


----------



## Black Stuart

Listen up folks - we have another one, his handle is Agnostic (where do they come from).

 Agnostic - a very simple question - who listens to music in your home - the measuring instruments or your ears.

 That the human ear may not be as accurate as a measuring instrument is completely beside the point, totally irrelevant - can't you see this.

 The 'true believers' are'nt those who can tell the difference - it's your lot, with the closed minds or bad hearing or both.

 Your statement that a 'fact is something that might reasonably be assumed' is hilarious.

 Have you ever made a pair of I/Cs, in fact have you ever made anything to do with Hi-fi, do let us know - why are all these theorists such frightened rabbits?


----------



## poo

I always figured Patrick was a rich guy with a heap of time on his hands taking the piss out of 'audiophiles'...

 Guess not...


 Maybe...








 Regardless - keep it up mate - hope it brings you as much enjoyment as my hobby brings me.


----------



## Agnostic

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Typical a quote of somebody who actually never experimented with cables or listened to high end cables himself.

 As some scientists proof, conductor is important, dielectric is important. But all you guys say; it's not audible, right.


 If you cannot run the 100 meters in 9.74, it doesn't mean nobody else can!

 saying you don't hear a difference doesn't proof anything for me._

 

As you may have noticed I did not say cables make no difference. Actually I think it's _*very*_ likely I would hear a difference even if there isn't one. Just because that's the way the human mind works. I merely stated that saying you hear a difference doesn't prove anything. 

 At the moment for power cables the fact is that all evidence I'm aware of is against them making any difference whatsoever. Therefore I take the reasonable position that I don't lend credence to unfounded claims until there is evidence to the contrary. 

 Saying that I haven't listened to high end cables merely proves you did not understand the logical argument I made.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Agnostic* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_As you may have noticed I did not say cables make no difference. Actually I think it's *very* likely I would hear a difference even if there isn't one. Just because that's the way the human mind works. I merely stated that saying you hear a difference doesn't prove anything. 

 At the moment for power cables the fact is that all evidence I'm aware of is against them making any difference whatsoever. Therefore I take the reasonable position that I don't lend credence to unfounded claims until there is evidence to the contrary. 

 Saying that I haven't listened to high end cables merely proves you did not understand the logical argument I made._

 

It didn't seem so logical to me, far from scientific, even!
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Since it is my mind, it IS real for me!

 "all evidence I'm aware of is against them making any difference whatsoever. Therefore I take the reasonable position that I don't lend credence to unfounded claims until there is evidence to the contrary."

 You didn't read any other cable threads did you? I posted measurements of cables wich clearly showed huge differences between the best measuring cable and the worse measuring cable! the figures are in the realms of differences between components! And, strangely enough, the non cable believers CAN actually hear differences between components!

 If you measurement lovers don't trust your own measurements, then what will you believe?! All they can come up with is: "inaudable".

 You just blab with the mayority( which never heard actually high quality cables) instead of listening and experimenting yourself.


----------



## Patrick82

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Agnostic* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_As you may have noticed I did not say cables make no difference. Actually I think it's *very* likely I would hear a difference even if there isn't one. Just because that's the way the human mind works. I merely stated that saying you hear a difference doesn't prove anything._

 

Maybe the newbies have a little placebo in their first year of this hobby. But the more experienced you get the more you learn to avoid it. I rather trust a monkey with 100 years of experience than a measurement tool with no experience.


  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Agnostic* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_At the moment for power cables the fact is that all evidence I'm aware of is against them making any difference whatsoever. Therefore I take the reasonable position that I don't lend credence to unfounded claims until there is evidence to the contrary._

 

All that "evidence" comes from other skeptics who say cables don't make a difference because they have heard someone else say it too.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rhymesgalore* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Exactly my thoughts._

 

It might be the case, but it's a fact that most of his findings concur with my findings after extensive experimenting with cables and construction.

 So, if you know how to read between the lines, this goes for every thread on head-fi, then you actually might learn or gain something here.


----------



## tourmaline

If you don't like Patrick's threads then don't burst in and read or comment.
 There's no-one pointing a shotgun against your head making you read his threads.


----------



## Agnostic

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_It didn't seem so logical to me, far from scientific, even!
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Since it is my mind, it IS real for me!

 "all evidence I'm aware of is against them making any difference whatsoever. Therefore I take the reasonable position that I don't lend credence to unfounded claims until there is evidence to the contrary."

 You didn't read any other cable threads did you? I posted measurements of cables wich clearly showed huge differences between the best measuring cable and the worse measuring cable! the figures are in the realms of differences between components! And, strangely enough, the non cable believers CAN actually hear differences between components!

 If you measurement lovers don't trust your own measurements, then what will you believe?! All they can come up with is: "inaudable".

 You just blab with the mayority( who never heard actually high quality cables) instead of listening and experimenting yourself._

 

Once more I did _NOT_ I repeat *NOT* say that cables make no difference. (geez 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




) What I am saying is that I'm sceptical of system "upgrades" that have no foundation in scientific theory, have not shown to be detectable in objective test, and show no measurable difference that explains their "improved quality" and whose most salient feature is that they are very expensive. I guess I must be nuts.

 If you hear a difference that's very nice. If you like it, good for you. Just don't claim objectivity. You say: "Since it is my mind, it IS real for me!" Look up the definition of subjective please?


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Agnostic* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Once more I did NOT I repeat *NOT* say that cables make no difference. (geez 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




) What I am saying is that I'm sceptical of system "upgrades" that have no foundation in scientific theory, have not shown to be detectable in objective test, and show no measurable difference that explains their "improved quality" and whose most salient feature is that they are very expensive. I guess I must be nuts.

 If you hear a difference that's very nice. If you like it, good for you. Just don't claim objectivity. You say: "Since it is my mind, it IS real for me!" Look up the definition of subjective please?_

 

Neither do components with the same specs, yet they sound different. So, don't claim objectivity.

 You never read the thread i am talking about, did you! I present figures of differences in cables, is that prove enough for you?! They have scientific background, capacitance and inductance are recognized to make cables sound different, as is the insulator! Teflon is the scientifically proven best insulator after a vacuum and air. Some brands use both air and teflon insulation, they sound better then the bunch!

 Knowing it all IS subjective. Thinking of knowing it even better then presented figures is rediculous!


----------



## stevenkelby

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Agnostic* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_At the moment for power cables the fact is that all evidence I'm aware of is against them making any difference whatsoever._

 

Just to be clear and your beliefs, are you saying that any materials, in any construction, for a power cord should all sound the same? Yes?

 So you are saying that a $1000 power cable will measure and sound exactly the same as one made from twisted together bits of tinfoil, old rusty pieces of metal and wire coat-hangers? Yes?

 If not, at which point between the two examples I listed can you provide evidence to prove that above that point, all cables are the same?

 If you accept my argument that a $1000 cable and one made bits of scrap metal will sound different (which you may not), then can you tell me if a home made power cord made from speaker wire will sound the same as a $1000 cable? How about a $5 power cable from radioshack? Where is your evidence to show where the minimum standard is?

 My point is that it seems naive to assume that "all cables sound the same" when logically, at some point, they probably don't. If you can't provide evidence to prove that they all sound the same, then your position is equally as weak as the other sides.

 Surely a lack of evidence doesn't prove the non-existence of a thing?


----------



## i has a can

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_With Patrick, it's not about the Valhalla cables or the ERS paper or whatever tweek he's going on about at the moment. It's about the attention that this supposedly 'extreme' behaviour brings. He's starved for attention and goes from one audio site to another to get it by coming across as increasingly wierd, out of tough with reality, and whacked out as a mad scientist who 'lives' for this stuff. 

 Seems to me what he really lives for is the attention. That's what his bizarre movies about ERS paper with hushed whispers are all about. It's all for the "look at me, I'm the extreme tweeker" effect. Same goes for his replies to the criticism that he gets. The more criticism the better because that gives him further opportunities to show us how "into" his tweeking habit he is (or he wants us to think he is). He plays the criticism off by pretending that he doesn't understand what people find so odd about his behaviour.

 If nobody paid attention to him, he would quickly go away and quit spending his money of these things. He would end up buying an 'extreme' pair of cowboy boots or toothpick holders instead, wherever he could find an online audience because he hasn't built a life for himself away from his keyboard.

 That's my take on it. Notice that he doesn't respond to very many threads that he didn't start himself and that he never starts a thread that isn't about himself.

 I suppose I should be sorry for being so direct, but sometimes you've just got to say what you've got to say. I don't have any problem with Patrick and do believe, at least to an extent, that he believes in what he is saying. But I think that over time, the "what" parts of what he's saying have become completely secondary to the "me" parts of the messages he's converying. It's not about the tweeks, it's about him, and that's fine. It's a free world afterall._

 






 now that you said it, the thread has nowhere to go and becomes another cable debate...


----------



## earwicker7

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *stevenkelby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_So you are saying that a $1000 power cable will measure and sound exactly the same as one made from twisted together bits of tinfoil, old rusty pieces of metal and wire coat-hangers?_

 

Unfortunately, there are many so-called "experts" (usually 1st year engineering students) who claim exactly this. 

 However, when you look at their stereo equipment, for some bizarre reason, they don't use coathangers for speaker cables, interconnects, or power cords. Hmm, could this be because they don't believe their own hyperbole?


----------



## meat01

Quote:


 However, when you look at their stereo equipment, for some bizarre reason, they don't use coathangers for speaker cables, interconnects, or power cords. Hmm, could this be because they don't believe their own hyperbole? 
 

I made an interconnect out of paper clips and scotch tape. Although it sounded *exactly* like my copper and silver cables, it didn't hold up well and was more time consuming to make than just using the rca cables that came with the player.


----------



## omegaman

I think patrick is great its people like him who spice up the forum,

 Whatever your views are on cables or paper etc every time he starts a thread I'm sure you can't help to have a read.


----------



## earwicker7

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *meat01* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I made an interconnect out of paper clips and scotch tape. Although it sounded *exactly* like my copper and silver cables, it didn't hold up well and was more time consuming to make than just using the rca cables that came with the player._

 

Why would anyone pay $10 for Radio Shack cables when they can use a perfectly good coathanger for 50 cents?


----------



## rsaavedra

Interestingly, people talk about audible differences between cables. How about differences between different auditions when using exactly the same equipment and music, but changing only very slightly the position of the headphones on your head.

 With both circumaural and supraaural headphones, a slight change in their position on your head with respect to your earlobes and ear canal opening will potentially change quite a bit how sound is perceived. So the following are all possible causes of audible differences:

 1) Different component in the chain: transducers, headphone cable, amp, interconnect, source, power supply.

 2) Different positioning between transducers and our ears (this happens to some degree almost certainly between all auditions)

 3) Our brains being stubbornly deceitful (to bring back the example I like, the "_full moon larger at the horizon_" recurrent illusion)


 [size=xx-small]PS. That wasn´t exactly on topic, but anyway wanted to get it out of my system[/size]


----------



## n4k33n

I think hes insane because I went to his myspace and saw a video heavy on the trance of him just rummaging around in his fridge. What the bleep? Seriously, if you want a lol or 2, go to his myspace.


----------



## meat01

Quote:


 Why would anyone pay $10 for Radio Shack cables when they can use a perfectly good coathanger for 50 cents? 
 

I told you, the coat hanger is stiffer and takes time to build and is a pain to work with. The coathanger is not worth the trouble.

 The real question is why anyone would spend more than $50 on a cable when anything will work?

 Patrick is entertaining and I have no problem with him.


----------



## slwiser

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Interestingly, people talk about audible differences between cables. How about differences between different auditions when using exactly the same equipment and music, but changing only very slightly the position of the headphones on your head.

 With both circumaural and supraaural headphones, a slight change in their position on your head with respect to your earlobes and ear canal opening will potentially change quite a bit how sound is perceived. So the following are all possible causes of audible differences:

 1) Different component in the chain: transducers, headphone cable, amp, interconnect, source, power supply.

 2) Different positioning between transducers and our ears (this happens to some degree almost certainly between all auditions)

 3) Our brains being stubbornly deceitful (to bring back the example I like, the "full moon larger at the horizon" recurrent illusion)


 [size=xx-small]PS. That wasn´t exactly on topic, but anyway wanted to get it out of my system[/size] 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

How about blood pressure. I find that mine has an effect on what I hear.


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *slwiser* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_How about blood pressure. I find that mine has an effect on what I hear._

 

Well that too, plus anything that can change your mood: e.g. time of day, humidity, cold or hot weather, spirits-induced relaxation, things like that 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 (seriously though)


----------



## Patrick82

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Well that too, plus anything that can change your mood: e.g. time of day, humidity, cold or hot weather, spirits-induced relaxation, things like that 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 (seriously though)_

 

I haven't noticed those things affecting my hearing, I always have the same mood and I don't know what day or time it is. It sounds the same when I wake up as when I go to bed. Tweaks make bigger differences.


----------



## fwojciec

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Well that too, plus anything that can change your mood: e.g. time of day, humidity, cold or hot weather, spirits-induced relaxation, things like that 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 (seriously though)_

 

I completely agree. Physiological dimension of things, generally speaking, is most often completely ignored and I have certainly found it to be much more significant influence than things like cable changes. Mood, level of tiredness, general health and well-being, diet, as well as things like time of the day, air pressure, humidity, or weather -- all these have a huge effect on the listening experience. I'm listening to the same system on daily basis and it is amazing how different it can sound depending on how I feel.

 Sometimes when I read things in these forums it also seems to me like most people believe hearing to be something completely passive, as if we were just a membrane that receives auditory stimuli in an objective way or something (that it would be something achievable by means of "experience" for example, as per Patrick's conjectures - which I personally find amusing and read with pleasure). Perception in general works very differently, it is an active, though mostly unconscious, discernment of particular details from an otherwise overwhelming richness of experience. I know, for example, that I can easily "work myself up" to start enjoying music more very easily, it is enough that I start moving around, bouncing my head to the rhythm or tapping my foot, dancing or whatever - suddenly the bass feels bigger, the music more engaging, the dynamics much more apparent etc. The same principle, of course, works on many different levels, and in much more subtle ways as well. 

 To me, and I am sorry in case someone feels offended by this, believing in the miraculous power of cables, hearing substantial differences between them, is much like speaking to "the Lord" on regular basis - in the sense that it can't be proved objectively by any means, yet those who experience it are perfectly sure of the reality, the actuality of their experiences... But Lord, it seems, only speaks to the few chosen ones, so that obviously gives rise to impassioned debates that no arguments could possibly resolve.


----------



## earwicker7

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *meat01* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The real question is why anyone would spend more than $50 on a cable when anything will work?_

 

Eh, used to be in that camp. Then I changed power cords from stock to Cardas entry-level (not much over $100). Day and night.

 Here's my view on it. I don't think anyone will claim that you can't make a bad A/C cable that will cause noise to enter your system. So it logically follows that a better cable can be made. You can't say that it's all or nothing, because if this were the case, that bad A/C wouldn't work at all, but it does. So there is a continuum. I don't see how this is even debatable. People act like A/C power is digital, either a 0 or a 1.


----------



## LawnGnome

Agnostic, haven't seen you in many of the cable threads before.

 But just to tell you now, don't bother. They are too ignorant to even attempt to understand. They NEVER post ANY remotely scientific support for their claims. All they have is flawed analogies. (Which are very illogical) And then they try to tell people where they can and can not post. 

 As for the hearing differences. I definitely notice my hearing appears different depending on time of day and mood. Just like ALL my other senses, how I perceive them changes greatly with the state of my mind, because our senses are only interpretations. And not reliable measuring instruments.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *meat01* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I made an interconnect out of paper clips and scotch tape. Although it sounded *exactly* like my copper and silver cables, it didn't hold up well and was more time consuming to make than just using the rca cables that came with the player._

 

Somehow i don't believe ya, since metal doesn't conduct as good as silver or copper. I placed a table with figures of conductivity in another thread and metal isn't even close to copper or silver!

 here you go:

 Silver 1.59 Best 
 Copper 1.72 
 Gold 2.44 
 Aluminum 2.84 
 Zinc 5.8 
 Platinum 10.0 
 Steel 10.4 
 Tin 11.5 Worst 

 Silver conducts 5 times better then your metal paperclips.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *LawnGnome* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Agnostic, haven't seen you in many of the cable threads before.

 But just to tell you now, don't bother. They are too ignorant to even attempt to understand. They NEVER post ANY remotely scientific support for their claims. All they have is flawed analogies. (Which are very illogical) And then they try to tell people where they can and can not post. 

 As for the hearing differences. I definitely notice my hearing appears different depending on time of day and mood. Just like ALL my other senses, how I perceive them changes greatly with the state of my mind, because our senses are only interpretations. And not reliable measuring instruments._

 

It wasn't why, but more the way you posted in a certain thread.


----------



## earwicker7

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *LawnGnome* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Agnostic, haven't seen you in many of the cable threads before.

 But just to tell you now, don't bother. They are too ignorant to even attempt to understand. They NEVER post ANY remotely scientific support for their claims. All they have is flawed analogies. (Which are very illogical) And then they try to tell people where they can and can not post._

 

So where are the peer-reviewed studies that show that cables make no difference?


----------



## fwojciec

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *earwicker7* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_So where are the peer-reviewed studies that show that cables make no difference?_

 

The burden of proof is on your shoulders, friend, you are the one making a positive claim here... Proof of non-exitence of something that can't be confirmed to actually exist in the first place is logically impossible anyways.


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I placed a table with figures of conductivity in another thread and metal isn't even close to copper or silver!

 here you go:

 Silver 1.59 Best 
 Copper 1.72 
 Gold 2.44 
 Aluminum 2.84 
 Zinc 5.8 
 Platinum 10.0 
 Steel 10.4 
 Tin 11.5 Worst _

 


 What units are those numbers in?

 Also, Zn doesn´t come right after Al in electrical conductivity, Be does.

 Here´s a fuller table with conductivity values for each element, submitted a while ago:

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showpo...20&postcount=4


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *fwojciec* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I completely agree. Physiological dimension of things, generally speaking, is most often completely ignored and I have certainly found it to be much more significant influence than things like cable changes. Mood, level of tiredness, general health and well-being, diet, as well as things like time of the day, air pressure, humidity, or weather -- all these have a huge effect on the listening experience. I'm listening to the same system on daily basis and it is amazing how different it can sound depending on how I feel.

 Sometimes when I read things in these forums it also seems to me like most people believe hearing to be something completely passive, as if we were just a membrane that receives auditory stimuli in an objective way or something (that it would be something achievable by means of "experience" for example, as per Patrick's conjectures - which I personally find amusing and read with pleasure). Perception in general works very differently, it is an active, though mostly unconscious, discernment of particular details from an otherwise overwhelming richness of experience. I know, for example, that I can easily "work myself up" to start enjoying music more very easily, it is enough that I start moving around, bouncing my head to the rhythm or tapping my foot, dancing or whatever - suddenly the bass feels bigger, the music more engaging, the dynamics much more apparent etc. The same principle, of course, works on many different levels, and in much more subtle ways as well. 

 To me, and I am sorry in case someone feels offended by this, believing in the miraculous power of cables, hearing substantial differences between them, is much like speaking to "the Lord" on regular basis - in the sense that it can't be proved objectively by any means, yet those who experience it are perfectly sure of the reality, the actuality of their experiences... But Lord, it seems, only speaks to the few chosen ones, so that obviously gives rise to impassioned debates that no arguments could possibly resolve._

 

It is not miraculous, i presented even the figures why a certain cable sounded much better. But, Some non believers just couldn't understand science, you cannot do anything about that.

 A fact is that most people who state there is no difference between cables never actually tried better or high end cables themselves. They stick to their cheap 50 cents cable and make it a fact that a higher priced cable cannot be any better.

 This assumption is as flawed as you think we are.

 Look at the figures between cables measured and you see 800 and 600 percent difference between those 2 figures in the best and worse measured cable. 

 All you people say is it isn't audible, without scientific evidence!


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *fwojciec* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The burden of proof is on your shoulders, friend, you are the one making a positive claim here... Proof of non-exitence of something that can't be confirmed to actually exist in the first place is logically impossible anyways._

 

You make the negative claims, so prove that to us.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_What units are those numbers in?

 Also, Zn doesn´t come right after Al in electrical conductivity, Be does.

 Here´s a fuller table with conductivity values for each element, submitted a while ago:

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showpo...20&postcount=4_

 

Silver is also the best conductor of electricity, as shown by the following chart of bulk resistance measured in micro-ohms/centimeter:

 Silver 1.59 Best 
 Copper 1.72 
 Gold 2.44 
 Aluminum 2.84 
 Zinc 5.8 
 Platinum 10.0 
 Steel 10.4 
 Tin 11.5 Worst 


 There you go.

 It isn't interesting to know wich elements come in the table, but more wich elements conduct the best for audio.


----------



## fwojciec

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_What units are those numbers in?

 Also, Zn doesn´t come right after Al in electrical conductivity, Be does.

 Here´s a fuller table with conductivity values for each element, submitted a while ago:

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showpo...20&postcount=4_

 

The question is not really if different metals have different conductive properities, which is elementary knowledge, by the way, but whether these different conductivity figures can be in any ways related to differences in frequency of sound waves reproduced. We don't hear electrical current, after all.


----------



## fwojciec

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You make the negative claims, so prove that to us.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

Cool indeed 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




  Quote:


 *appeal to ignorance* (argumentum ex silentio) appealing to ignorance as evidence for something. (e.g., We have no evidence that God doesn't exist, therefore, he must exist. Or: Because we have no knowledge of alien visitors, that means they do not exist). Ignorance about something says nothing about its existence or non-existence. 
 

or a more detailed explanation for you:
  Quote:


 *Argumentum ad ignorantiam* (argument to ignorance). This is the fallacy of assuming something is true simply because it hasn't been proven false. For example, someone might argue that global warming is certainly occurring because nobody has demonstrated conclusively that it is not. But failing to prove the global warming theory false is not the same as proving it true.

 Whether or not an argumentum ad ignorantiam is really fallacious depends crucially upon the burden of proof. In an American courtroom, where the burden of proof rests with the prosecution, it would be fallacious for the prosecution to argue, "The defendant has no alibi, therefore he must have committed the crime." But it would be perfectly valid for the defense to argue, "The prosecution has not proven the defendant committed the crime, therefore you should declare him not guilty." Both statements have the form of an argumentum ad ignorantiam; the difference is the burden of proof.

 In debate, the proposing team in a debate round is usually (but not always) assumed to have the burden of proof, which means that if the team fails to prove the proposition to the satisfaction of the judge, the opposition wins. In a sense, the opposition team's case is assumed true until proven false. But the burden of proof can sometimes be shifted; for example, in some forms of debate, the proposing team can shift the burden of proof to the opposing team by presenting a prima facie case that would, in the absence of refutation, be sufficient to affirm the proposition. Still, the higher burden generally rests with the proposing team, which means that only the opposition is in a position to make an accusation of argumentum ad ignorantiam with respect to proving the proposition. 
 

or one more, just for the fun of it, and in case the one above was too confusing:

  Quote:


 *Ad ignorantium (Appeal to ignorance)*:
 DEF.- arguing that if something hasn’t been proved false, then it must be true; EX.- "U.F.Os must exist, because no one can prove that they don’t." 
 

I can't prove that aliens don't exist either


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *fwojciec* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The question is not really if different metals have different conductive properities, which is elementary knowledge, by the way, but whether these different conductivity figures can be in any ways related to differences in frequency of sound waves reproduced. We don't hear electrical current, after all._

 

True, but I wasn´t addressing that question. I was just pointing out (which was btw elementarily obvious 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




) what seemed to be an error on the sequence in his table, and possibly inappropriate units his table had for conductivity.


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *earwicker7* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Why would anyone pay $10 for Radio Shack cables when they can use a perfectly good coathanger for 50 cents?
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

Radio Shack cables cost less than $10. I got a great mini to mini the other day for four bucks plus change. A coathanger would get knocked out of the plug all the time, I'm afraid.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## Agnostic

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *LawnGnome* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Agnostic, haven't seen you in many of the cable threads before.

 But just to tell you now, don't bother. They are too ignorant to even attempt to understand. They NEVER post ANY remotely scientific support for their claims. All they have is flawed analogies. (Which are very illogical) And then they try to tell people where they can and can not post. 

 As for the hearing differences. I definitely notice my hearing appears different depending on time of day and mood. Just like ALL my other senses, how I perceive them changes greatly with the state of my mind, because our senses are only interpretations. And not reliable measuring instruments._

 

Hi Lawngnome, thanks for your advice. I didn't realize I had walked into a religious gathering. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



 I will just shut up now and quietly leave this thread before people start to be burned at the stake. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Dear Tourmaline and Patrick, where do I leave offerings to your gods Nordost Vishnu and Nordost Shiva so I may one day enter Nordost Walhalla?


----------



## LawnGnome

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Somehow i don't believe ya, since metal doesn't conduct as good as silver or copper.* I placed a table with figures of conductivity in another thread and metal isn't even close to copper or silver*!

 here you go:

 Silver 1.59 Best 
 Copper 1.72 
 Gold 2.44 
 Aluminum 2.84 
 Zinc 5.8 
 Platinum 10.0 
 Steel 10.4 
 Tin 11.5 Worst 

 Silver conducts 5 times better then your metal paperclips.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

Since when is silver and copper not metal?

 And like it has been said many many times, but people still are ignorant to, 

 Burden of proof lies SOLELY on the person making the claim.

 ALSO, lack of evidence against a claim is not valid evidence for the claim.

 If the second was true, I could claim the inside of the sun is made of magic cheese, and you would have to assume it true since you cannot disprove it.


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *LawnGnome* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Since when is silver and copper not metal?_

 

Yes that's another problem in his post, I assumed was a typo on what he meant to say.

 One other problem in his table is the fact that it doesn´t have just elements. Steel is not a chemical element but an alloy.


----------



## Agnostic

Just one last thing I found and wanted to share: 

  Quote:


 Nordost Shiva Mains Cable (10A or 16A IEC)
 Shiva is a new power cord from Nordost which redefines performance and value for money… £219.95 
 

I mean, it sure _*does*_ redefine performance and value for money, can't argue with that.


----------



## Vul Kuolun

I absolutely love tourmaline's posts.

 It's not just like he's presenting himself with pants down in every sentence without recognising it, its more like pants down, underpants down, balls shaved.
 His ratio of "evidence of incapacity-per-sentence" is unrivaled. Big fun.


----------



## Agnostic

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Vul Kuolun* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_pants down, underpants down, balls shaved._

 

Stop making me laugh! I'm trying to leave in a respectful manner!!!


----------



## fwojciec

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_True, but I wasn´t addressing that question. I was just pointing out (which was btw elementarily obvious 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




) what seemed to be an error on the sequence in his table, and possibly inappropriate units his table had for conductivity._

 

Sorry, I didn't mean to disagree with you on that, of course.


----------



## infinitesymphony

I believe that there are audible differences between cables. Am I willing to pay $3,000, even if I hear an improvement over my $35 pair? No. By that point, the law of diminishing returns has set in to such a point that the difference is not worthwhile _to me_.

 It's fine that one member likes the sound of Nordost Valhalla; I'm guessing that they are great cables. Here's my semi-scientific issue with Patrick's treatment of them. Nordost uses an extrusion process that makes the insides of the cable airtight--this important seal prevents the cables from oxidizing over time, hence one reason for their high cost. Patrick has taken these cables and hacked them apart, essentially ruining Nordost's proprietary process. They are now open to the air. Then, he has taken them and soldered them directly to different parts of his equipment, the metal solder joints further affecting the quality of the cables, especially given their initial construction.

 As others have said, most of us don't care how much money he's spending on cables, we're just skeptical about whether some of his tweaks are worthwhile. After all, it wasn't long ago that he was asking for placebo tweaks--in other words, tweaks for your audio system that only work if you believe in them (ex. Brilliant Pebbles, Clever Little Clock, Teleportation Tweak).


----------



## meat01

Quote:


 Somehow i don't believe ya, since metal doesn't conduct as good as silver or copper. I placed a table with figures of conductivity in another thread and metal isn't even close to copper or silver!

 here you go:

 Silver 1.59 Best
 Copper 1.72
 Gold 2.44
 Aluminum 2.84
 Zinc 5.8
 Platinum 10.0
 Steel 10.4
 Tin 11.5 Worst

 Silver conducts 5 times better then your metal paperclips. 
 

Try it yourself. Yes silver is a better conductor, but a better conductor does not mean a better sound. You are using science rather than your ears. Think about the legs in a resistor, capacitor or transistor that are not copper or silver, how could they even be in the signal path without changing the signal? The connector in your headphone amp is not copper or silver and it does not change the sound. What about all of that solder in your CD player?

 You can post your charts all day about conductivity and you can post your percentages that mean nothing all day. Use your ears. The type of metal in a cable does not change the sound. It just needs to conduct electricity and not be broken.


----------



## fwojciec

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Agnostic* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Just one last thing I found and wanted to share: 

  Quote:


 Nordost Shiva Mains Cable (10A or 16A IEC)
 Shiva is a new power cord from Nordost which redefines performance and value for money… £219.95 
 

I mean, it sure *does* redefine performance and value for money, can't argue with that. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			



_

 

No doubt about it


----------



## Agnostic

I think if you have a Nordost Valhalla you should also be unable to live without: 
  Quote:


 The Spork of the Gods

 Every mythic hero normally has an equally mythic weapon. Zeus had his thunderbolts. Thor had his hammer, Mjolnir. King Arthur had his Excalibur. Frodo and Bilbo had their Sting. Rhydderch Hael had his Dyrnwyn. King Kong had his bananas…you get the idea. It's time for you to join the ranks of the heroes and heroines of lore as you wield your own legendary weapon in your battle against a very powerful foe: hunger. 

 The Titanium Spork is ready for the challenge. Titanium is known for its great strength, corrosion resistance, and light weight, which makes this spork a valuable asset around feeding time. Imagine how much more food you could shovel in at your local buffet if you didn't have to worry about the strain of picking up a heavy fork or spoon. Your food consumption can become the stuff of legends. Even just holding the Titanium Spork in your hand, you can feel its power. It is perhaps the greatest gastronomic invention since lickable wallpaper. Hunger, beware - your end is near! 
 

What's the conductivity of titanium by the way? It might make a good IC... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 (never mind)  Quote:


 Silver 1.59 Best
 Copper 1.72
 Gold 2.44
 Aluminum 2.84
 Zinc 5.8
*Platinum 10.0*
 Steel 10.4
 Tin 11.5 Worst


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Agnostic* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_(never mind)_

 

That was platinum. 

 Silver has 27+ times the conductivity of Titanium (0.630 vs. 0.023)


----------



## Agnostic

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_That was platinum. 

 Silver has 27+ times the conductivity of Titanium (0.630 vs. 0.023)_

 

Ooops
 Thanks for correcting me! I might have ended up with a very disgusting dinner with such low conductivity!


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Agnostic* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Ooops
 Thanks for correcting me! I might have ended up with a very disgusting dinner with such low conductivity!_

 

Alka Seltzer might be in order to bring back the electron conductivity in your intestines


----------



## earwicker7

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *fwojciec* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Cool indeed 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	





 or a more detailed explanation for you:


 or one more, just for the fun of it, and in case the one above was too confusing:



 I can't prove that aliens don't exist either 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

Well, it's great that you can cut and paste definitions from The Skeptic's Dictionary (cut and paste, cut and paste... am I seeing a pattern amongst the cable haters
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 ), but I think you forgot one. I must admit that it may not be verbatim, as I'm, well, not cutting and pasting, but I think it goes something like this--

 Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

 It's kind of a fundamental idea for scientists who make real world progress as opposed to ones who kind of just sit there and... cut and paste.


----------



## fwojciec

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *earwicker7* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Well, it's great that you can cut and paste definitions from The Skeptic's Dictionary (cut and paste, cut and paste... am I seeing a pattern amongst the cable haters
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 ), but I think you forgot one. I must admit that it may not be verbatim, as I'm, well, not cutting and pasting, but I think it goes something like this--

 Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

 It's kind of a fundamental idea for scientists who make real world progress as opposed to ones who kind of just sit there and... cut and paste._

 

Logical value of a proposition does not depend on the technique with which is was posted in a forum. Similarly, whether something is a quotation or a paraphrase or an original formulation does not determine in advance its logical value. It's not a skeptics dictionary, it is a dictionary of logic. Things like this are called logical fallacies, not skeptical bias.

 So I have another logical fallacy for you to consider.

  Quote:


 Ad Hominem

 The argumentum ad hominem or ad feminam attempts to discredit an argument or position by drawing attention to characteristics of the person who is making the argument or who holds the position.

 Example: "The research and reasoning that supposedly supports (or that supposedly discredits) this intervention are a joke. The researchers are people who are not methodologically sophisticated and there have been rumors--I have no idea whether they're true or not--that they faked some of the data. The advocates (or opponents) of this intervention are the worst kind of sloppy thinkers. They are fanatical adherents who already have their minds made up; they've become true believers in their cause. They make arguments only a stupid person would accept, and mistakes in reasoning that would make an undergrad psych major blush. These are not the kind of people who deserve to be taken seriously." 
 

Here is the link where it came from, there are more there which are equally noteworthy: http://kspope.com/fallacies/fallacies.php

 As for "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence", true, but neither it is the evidence of actual existence. So are you are willing to pay thousands of dollars for something whose lack of existence cannot be proved?


----------



## earwicker7

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *fwojciec* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Logical value of a proposition does not depend on the technique with which is was posted in a forum. Similarly, whether something is a quotation or a paraphrase or an original formulation does not determine in advance its logical value. It's not a skeptics dictionary, it is a dictionary of logic. Things like this are called logical fallacies, not skeptical bias.

 So I have another logical fallacy for you to consider.



 Here is the link where it came from, there are more there which are equally noteworthy: http://kspope.com/fallacies/fallacies.php

 As for "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence", true, but neither it is the evidence of actual existence. So are you are willing to pay thousands of dollars for something whose lack of existence cannot be proved?_

 

You really don't need to quote that stuff. I've taken two years of symbolic logic, so I've heard it all before. Besides, anyone who knows the rules of logic knows that logicians don't decided truth, they decide validity. See below.

 Am I willing to pay thousands of dollars for something that can't be proven? Well, I have, so obviously the answer is yes. You can only get so far in life if you believe completely in the idea of proof. Proof is temperocentric in nature--ie, one decades truism is the next decades fallacy. The concept of proof is extremely useful, but it can be a prison if you let it rule you. Any scientist worth their weight will tell you that "proof" as understood by the average lay person is just a concept that is used by newspeople and politicians to further their point of view.

 Unlike many who debate this issue, I've personally tried different cables. It's amazing how many people who tout the scientific method refuse to actually engage in its central tenet, which is experimenting. You can call it buyer's placebo, but the stuff has a 30 day return policy, so there's no psychological reason for me to feel like "I'm stuck with it, may as well learn to like it." I've returned TONS of stuff, however my cables have never given me any reason to return them.


----------



## Zorander

I don't intend to get involved in this (rather ugly) debate but I thought I would post this link just FYI:

http://rockgrotto.proboards39.com/in...e=1#1146637632

 That's some further info, beside the different conductivities of different metals, on why silver can sound different (I stress again the word _difference_, which is not necessarily an improvement or otherwise).

 Cheers!


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_With Patrick, it's not about the Valhalla cables or the ERS paper or whatever tweek he's going on about at the moment. It's about the attention that this supposedly 'extreme' behaviour brings. He's starved for attention and goes from one audio site to another to get it by coming across as increasingly wierd, out of tough with reality, and whacked out as a mad scientist who 'lives' for this stuff. 

 Seems to me what he really lives for is the attention. That's what his bizarre movies about ERS paper with hushed whispers are all about. It's all for the "look at me, I'm the extreme tweeker" effect. Same goes for his replies to the criticism that he gets. The more criticism the better because that gives him further opportunities to show us how "into" his tweeking habit he is (or he wants us to think he is). He plays the criticism off by pretending that he doesn't understand what people find so odd about his behaviour.

 If nobody paid attention to him, he would quickly go away and quit spending his money of these things. He would end up buying an 'extreme' pair of cowboy boots or toothpick holders instead, wherever he could find an online audience because he hasn't built a life for himself away from his keyboard.

 That's my take on it. Notice that he doesn't respond to very many threads that he didn't start himself and that he never starts a thread that isn't about himself.

 I suppose I should be sorry for being so direct, but sometimes you've just got to say what you've got to say. I don't have any problem with Patrick and do believe, at least to an extent, that he believes in what he is saying. But I think that over time, the "what" parts of what he's saying have become completely secondary to the "me" parts of the messages he's converying. It's not about the tweeks, it's about him, and that's fine. It's a free world afterall._

 

Thanks Wayne....my take exactly, but sometimes get a little annoying, and people tend to answer him...even if it is only to throw an egg and go away... 


  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *SilverTrumpet999* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I do believe that RatShack cables can be improved upon, but the absolute top end for cabling for me will be BJC. Studios use these; the music you are listening to may well have been mixed using BJC interconnects. They have the $$ to afford more, so why don't they? 
 I think this entire thing is psychological once you reach the equivalent of BJC._

 

I 100% agree on that...


  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Great story, only the problem is that the 20.000 dollar device isn't made for musical reproduction! Any decent 50 dollar cable will let that device do it's job where it was intended for, simple as that. But it will NOT make a good amp shine._

 

May I ask you why not? A serious answer please!!!



 Guys I think that you need to be a little bit objective, you really believe that audio is some kind of unknown voodooish electrical energy that has to be treated with respect, like in a mystic way taking the hat off, before plugging or unplugging a conductor, because we do not know what is involved there???

*Really? Sorry but you can not be more wrong!!!!* 

 Audio as any other mixture of frequencies in an electric flow, inside a conductor, follow the same rules, mathematical expressions, and physical parameters we know till now. And that we have known for the last 50 years at least, there is no such an unknown parameter or expression that will rule this unknown voodooish energy that will react differently to any other electric flow, some of them even with more higher freq spectrum and more problems than audio...Being objective audio spectrum carries one of the lowest freq spectrum, though it has indeed the lowest incidence of the problems we have in electronics. It has less problems than video, or radio freqs, for example, just to mention two... 


  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *fwojciec* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_As for "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence", true, but neither it is the evidence of actual existence. So are you are willing to pay thousands of dollars for something whose lack of existence cannot be proved?_

 

I indeed prefer to wait till it can be proved (or not) and then if it is, wait till someone design the ideal conductor, with the ideal materials, geometry, dielectric, plugs, soldering or crimping methods, for all the scenarios, and then buy it...I think that it is more logical than follow a ghost...if you are happy which the cables or setup you already have of course!!!!


----------



## Spareribs

These headphone ads keep following this long thread! Ahhh!!!


----------



## stevenkelby

Since we're having our weekly cable-debate:

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *earwicker7* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_ I don't think anyone will claim that you can't make a bad A/C cable that will cause noise to enter your system. So it logically follows that a better cable can be made. You can't say that it's all or nothing, because if this were the case, that bad A/C wouldn't work at all, but it does. So there is a continuum. I don't see how this is even debatable._

 

Can anyone give an argument against this theory? 

 Is anyone brave enough to admit that at some stage there IS a difference between cables? Or can you provide an argument to refute this theory?

 Lawngnome?

 Agnostic?

 Anyone else?


----------



## Jon118

Time for the combo breaker on that one. A bad cable is easy to be made, but most people will argue that you can only make a cable so good though. That's like saying that it is obvious that we can have slow cars, but we also have faster regular ones. So obviously we can make ones that go past the speed of light as well, right? Wrong, possibly, but that's a whole other thread. 

 The point here is that there are limits, there gets to a point where cables can not be improved upon, and a lot of people think the Nordost have passed that limit, meaning that they are no better than those at the limit, just more expensive. They use physics to rationalize their arguments, whereas the advocates of cables believe what they hear, but the changes may or may not actually be there, we will never know since we can not be certain we are hearing exactly what the other person is hearing.

 Long story short some people hear a difference, so they believe in cables, whereas others believe in physics so they don't hear a difference. I haven't heard these high-end cables so I can't officially side in either camp, but I can see that there could be a limit and these Nordosts are probably past it. That said I will reserve judgment until I actually hear these, which will probably be never, so I won't say whether I believe it or not. I will simply say the above argument is not convincing, even to someone like me.

 *So to answer the above challenge fully, I forgot to put that there is a difference in cables to an extent, but a poorly made cable that barely works is hardly what most people use in place of the Nordost. There is a difference but you're trying to box this argument in when things far beyond that box are being discussed.


----------



## stevenkelby

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Jon118* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_
 The point here is that there are limits, there gets to a point where cables can not be improved upon,_

 

Yes, excellent. I am glad you are brave enough to admit that at some stage there is a difference between cables! Now for the wanna-be scientists among us (particularly those I mentioned in my last post), here is my point:

 If you accept that at some point there is a difference between cables that do make a difference and those that don't (as Jon does), can you provide evidence to define the point after which a cable will not affect the sound? 

 Tell me, what are the minimum and maximum, measured, figures for a cable to be at a point where no further money spent will _audibly _affect the sound and why do you give those figures and not others?

 Can you do it? If not, the alternative is self evident, I think.


----------



## earwicker7

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *stevenkelby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Since we're having our weekly cable-debate:



 Can anyone give an argument against this theory? 

 Is anyone brave enough to admit that at some stage there IS a difference between cables? Or can you provide an argument to refute this theory?

 Lawngnome?

 Agnostic?

 Anyone else?_

 

To further my theory, I thought I'd also ask an upfront question--is anyone out there proposing that cables are a binary system? Ie, they either work or they don't?

 Again, I will fall back on the idea that this proposition negates the chance of any continuum. An analogous situation (and don't anyone dare say this is a false analogy--you're the ones proposing a binary system) is digital music. It either sends a 0 or a 1. There is no 0.5. There is no 0.3. 

 The cable deniers are implying that they either work perfectly (analogous to one) or don't work at all (analogous to zero). Now if you follow the written rules of symbolic logic, you've nailed yourself into a classic situation--A v ~A (the v stands for "or", the ~ stands for "not"). It is NOT LOGICALLY VALID to assert at this point that you can make a cable that falls between the two. In other words, following logic and not "voodoo", it is not feasible to make a noisy cable. I don't think anyone outside of Engineering 101 will say this isn't possible.

 So, following this line of thought, you HAVE TO say that cables are not a binary system. If it is not a binary system, by definition there are degrees of difference. I'm sorry, but you have to choose. Either it is a binary system and there is no possibility of making a bad cable or there are differences. If there are differences, by definition it is possible to have a better cable. 

 Which side are you on?


----------



## stevenkelby

Good post, agreed.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *earwicker7* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_
 Which side are you on?_

 

Me? I think I've heard differences but can't say it with 100% confidence. I plan to do some thorough DBT testing and post results but obviously want to do it right and scientifically (ABX).

 Until then I reserve judgment.

 Even if I can prove no difference, it will only be my ears with my system and my music that produced no difference. If I do "prove" a difference I won't expect anyone else to believe it. Too many people still believe in the tooth fairy (or historical equivalent...) to expect logic from the public, especially on an on-line audio site!


----------



## vcoheda

the cable deniers are to me the least audiophile of us all - the thing that they trust the least is that which is generally considered of most importance to the rest: our ears.


----------



## LawnGnome

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *stevenkelby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Since we're having our weekly cable-debate:



 Can anyone give an argument against this theory? 

 Is anyone brave enough to admit that at some stage there IS a difference between cables? Or can you provide an argument to refute this theory?

 Lawngnome?

 Agnostic?

 Anyone else?_

 

Long distance runs of several km's passing signals of several megahertz don't need the cables people speak of. They use simple copper cables of a decent quality.

 Audio is NOT high frequency application in the slightest. it is VERY low frequency compared to many other signals. An audio signal is not very demanding at all.

 There has been blind testing done to refute believers, I'll post some links later.

 Also, if cable manufacturers believed cables made such a difference, why has no one claimed this million dollars?

http://www.randi.org/jr/120304youve.html

 Nobody is really saying there is no difference. They are saying there is no audible difference.


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *LawnGnome* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Long distance runs of several km's passing signals of several megahertz don't need the cables people speak of. They use simple copper cables of a decent quality.

 Audio is NOT high frequency application in the slightest. it is VERY low frequency compared to many other signals. An audio signal is not very demanding at all.

 There has been blind testing done to refute believers, I'll post some links later.

 Also, if cable manufacturers believed cables made such a difference, why has no one claimed this million dollars?

http://www.randi.org/jr/120304youve.html

 Nobody is really saying there is no difference. They are saying there is no audible difference._

 

thanks for the link. yeah. the bybee and holographic coat rack sounds like pure snake oil. 

 Interconnect are not quite snake oil, but it does take a top system and good ears to appreciate the difference.

 Power cable, otoh, are much easier to appreciate. I was able to measure few more db in the 20-40hz bass region with the better power cable on my amp. yes its clearly audible subjectively. 

 I am an EE and I have no idea how to measure the difference in cable (at least not with equipments you normally find in the labs).


----------



## stevenkelby

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *LawnGnome* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Nobody is really saying there is no difference. They are saying there is no audible difference._

 

Yes that's why I italicized the word _audibly_ in my other post. Maybe I should have emboldened it too. 

  Quote:


 Tell me, what are the minimum and maximum, measured, figures for a cable to be at a point where no further money spent will _*audibly *_affect the sound and why do you give those figures and not others? 
 

Now, to repeat the question you didn't answer, I'll walk you through it, step by step with yes or no answers, if you are willing to play along.

 Do you believe that at some point in the range from "paper clips and rust" to "Valhalla" there IS an audible difference between cables?

 Yes or no?


----------



## Chu

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *vcoheda* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_the cable deniers are to me the least audiophile of us all - the thing that they trust the least is that which is generally considered of most importance to the rest: our ears._

 

This is a straw man. The ultimate tool is still your ears. The problem is in your brain. We are incredibly weak versus suggestion and placebo, and I do not understand why eliminating these things is so abhorant.


----------



## MrJoshua

I'll start this post by saying I've never tried a custom power cable, and I most likely never will, but, this is my angle on it:

 First of all, I can appreciate the difference in the quality of interconnects, but only up to a certain price-point (up to about $80 each)... The performance over the stock bell-wire interconnects is very obvious, but I've personally found that over this sort of price-point, I haven't really been able to discern a difference (between an $80 and a $200 interconnect for example).

 Likewise with speaker wire although I've not even spent that much... $10 per metre has been the most I've spent, again, because I couldn't tell enough of a difference above this price-point.

 I've recabled my HD-25 SP Headphones from the stock Steel cable to a decent Star Quad that I DIYed, and I can also tell a big difference here too.

 So what I'm trying to say is that for audio signals, I am fine with upgrading the cables, up to a certain level. I suppose my gear is all mid priced consumer/prosumer so maybe I'd notice a bigger difference in the higher priced cables if my equipment was also higher priced, who knows.

 What I can't understand is this business about power cables:

 OK, if they're *after* a power conditioner, then I'll believe in their benefits a little bit more, but those saying that without a power conditioner, or before one, they can notice huge differences in sound, I just can't understand. 

 I've said this before, but how can the last metre of cable possibly change the electricity that's been flowing for potentially hundreds of miles over industrial grade cable, through sub-stations, into your house (which could have dubious wiring internally), through fuse/breaker boxes etc etc etc... I just cannot fathom how a cable, however well it's been braided and what fancypants conductor/dialetric it uses, could possibly improve on the transfer of energy from such an unpure source.

 It just boggles the mind!


----------



## Chu

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *earwicker7* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_So, following this line of thought, you HAVE TO say that cables are not a binary system. If it is not a binary system, by definition there are degrees of difference. I'm sorry, but you have to choose. Either it is a binary system and there is no possibility of making a bad cable or there are differences. If there are differences, by definition it is possible to have a better cable. 

 Which side are you on?_

 

This is also a straw man. The binary test is "can this cable reproduce an audio signal to a degree s.t. any variance in the reproduction is below an audible threshold."


----------



## Chu

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *stevenkelby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_
 Now, to repeat the question you didn't answer, I'll walk you through it, step by step with yes or no answers, if you are willing to play along.

 Do you believe that at some point in the range from "paper clips and rust" to "Valhalla" there IS an audible difference between cables?

 Yes or no?_

 

The problem with playing this game is the tests that that "skeptics" would use to explore the thresholds further are banned from discussion.


----------



## outmatch

"The world is flat."
 "The sun revolves around the world."
 "Heavier objects fall down at faster rate than lighter ones."
 "Light is a form of wave and cannot be affected by gravitational force."
 "Time is an absolute quantity."

 That were all facts at a point in human's history.

 Anything not yet proved or disproved must not be assumed as a fact. Objectivity only exists in the rules you fabricated, such as 1+1 must equal 2.

 Discussing about cables is pointless, you cannot actually prove or disprove anything. You are trying to find absolutes in this relative universe.


----------



## infinitesymphony

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *outmatch* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Discussing about cables is pointless, you cannot actually prove or disprove anything._

 

No... Discussion about cables is usually pointless because people take sides; their decision is not open to change. Double-blind testing is not allowed on Head-Fi because the methods of ABXing cables always draw criticism--for some people, no DBT is without error.

 However, with cables, one can empirically measure electrical qualities that affect the transmission of the signal. Impedance, resistance, capacitance, inductance, shielding, dielectric, and connector quality, for example.


----------



## stevenkelby

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *MrJoshua* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_
 I've said this before, but how can the last metre of cable possibly change the electricity that's been flowing for potentially hundreds of miles over industrial grade cable, through sub-stations, into your house (which could have dubious wiring internally), through fuse/breaker boxes etc etc etc... I just cannot fathom how a cable, however well it's been braided and what fancypants conductor/dialetric it uses, could possibly improve on the transfer of energy from such an unpure source.

 It just boggles the mind!_

 

I've written this before, but here's my theory:

 I know this isn't 100% right, but I think there are a lot of parallels between water flow and electricity flow. Water molecules - electrons, water pressure - current, water flow - voltage etc.

 So for water, The things affecting the quality of this flow are turbulence and variations in flow rate and pressure . The torrent of electricity rushing from the power station is very turbulent, like a mighty river raging. As this huge amount of flow gets slowed down through smaller channels the speed and pressure are reduced. Maybe a good power cord has the same speed and pressure of flow as a cheap one, but the "water" (current) is flowing more smoothly, with less turbulence.

 Similar to the way water flowing from an open tap in an old house can be swirling around as it comes out of the tap, all turbulent and messy.

 Newer houses have a few sheets of mesh in a little metal or plastic device as seen in most modern bathrooms which can reduce this to a nice smooth flow. You may have to open the tap a little more but you can get identical flow rate and pressure, but with much less turbulence.

 A good power cable is that little piece of metal or plastic screwed in the end of your bath tap. It smooths out the flow, regardless of what the juice was doing at the power station or in your walls.

 It cleanly aligns all the electrons into a smooth flow, all the electrons flowing in the same direction at the same speed.

 I don't know how true that is but even though it's hard to understand, logically you have to agree that electrons do exist, they are what powers our equipment, our equipment can only put out what goes in, and GI,GO.

 Now I'm not saying power cords make a difference one way or another, but if you read my last few posts, you have to admit that at some level, they 100%, positively do make an audible difference.

 What do you think?


----------



## stevenkelby

Quote: stevenkelby 

  Quote:


 Now, to repeat the question you didn't answer, I'll walk you through it, step by step with yes or no answers, if you are willing to play along.

 Do you believe that at some point in the range from "paper clips and rust" to "Valhalla" there IS an audible difference between cables?

 Yes or no? 
 


  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Chu* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The problem with playing this game is the tests that that "skeptics" would use to explore the thresholds further are banned from discussion._

 

Yes I understand that, but do you think my question is valid, and have you noticed no ne is willing to answer it?


----------



## Marc303

your theory about the flow of electricity would be nice if electricity actually flowed.

 it is AC current and so basically stays in one place and vibrates


----------



## stevenkelby

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Marc303* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_your theory about the flow of electricity would be nice if electricity actually flowed.

 it is AC current and so basically stays in one place and vibrates_

 

Hmmm. Right you are.

 So how about a comparison to water flowing back and forward in a pipe, it could move in jagged, turbulent waves if the pipe was rough and uneven, or in smooth, regular waves if the pipe was nice and smooth and consistent.

 Maybe a good power cable allows the AC to vibrate back and forward more smoothly, in a more orderly way than a rusty old coat hanger would?


----------



## Patrick82

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *fwojciec* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I know, for example, that I can easily "work myself up" to start enjoying music more very easily, it is enough that I start moving around, bouncing my head to the rhythm or tapping my foot, dancing or whatever - suddenly the bass feels bigger, the music more engaging, the dynamics much more apparent etc._

 

If you bang your head you get dizzy and then music sounds differently. 

 That's why quick A/B-ing of cables doesn't work because you need to bend under the table. The more quick A/B-ing you do the smaller the differences become because of fatigue. When I tested transports I eventually couldn't hear a difference at all, so I went to bed and slept. On the next day I heard huge differences.


----------



## Patrick82

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *earwicker7* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_People act like A/C power is digital, either a 0 or a 1._

 

Skeptics think audio is 0 and 1. They don't know that audio is analog. The AC power is analog because of the sinewaves. Skeptics think that the whole sinewave is inserted into the capacitor like a gas tank in a car. But only the top of the sinewave is used to charge the capacitor. As you can see at this site, you can change the sound by using a different sinewave shape and frequency. Using modified sinewaves with a power regenerator makes a bigger difference than power cords. I have used it for longer than aftermarket power cords.

 If you use a different thickness and material of the power cord, something changes but it is more subtle.


----------



## Agnostic

One last question to you "cable guys" before I stop wasting my time.

 Are any of you even willing to admit that it is _conceivable_ that some of the differences you hear between cables are possibly due to placebo effect. (I'm not saying that that is what you hear, I'm asking is it even theoretically possible.)

 a. If the answer to that question is yes, you need some different form of verification to prove that there is an *objective* difference. So far I haven't seen any. This does not _disprove any subjective_ differences any of you experience!

 b. If your answer is no, you are a mere biggot and I will stop wasting my time.

 For the record, no one here, as far as I've seen is saying that there are no subjective differences between cables. No one has even denied that there are some objective differences between cables. However that is not what this discussion is about. The confusion on the part of some people here is confusing subjective perceptions with objective data and making unfounded claims on that basis. It seems most of you cable guys are looking for objective theories to explain differences in subjective sound experiences. I have news for you. Differences in subjective sound experience do NOT require objective differences in sound.


----------



## chesebert

a subjective difference in sound occurs, granted not via placebo and is in the same person under the same condition at the same time, if and only if there is an objective difference in sound.


----------



## stevenkelby

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Agnostic* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_One last question to you "cable guys" before I stop wasting my time.

 Are any of you even willing to admit that it is conceivable that some of the differences you hear between cables are possibly due to placebo effect. (I'm not saying that that is what you hear, I'm asking is it even theoretically possible.)

 a. If the answer to that question is yes, you need some different form of verification to prove that there is an *objective* difference. So far I haven't seen any. This does not disprove any subjective differences any of you experience!

 b. If your answer is no, you are a mere biggot and I will stop wasting my time.

 For the record, no one here, as far as I've seen is saying that there are no subjective differences between cables. No one has even denied that there are some objective differences between cables. However that is not what this discussion is about. The confusion on the part of some people here is confusing subjective perceptions with objective data and making unfounded claims on that basis. It seems most of you cable guys are looking for objective theories to explain differences in subjective sound experiences. I have news for you. Differences in subjective sound experience do NOT require objective differences in sound._

 

I'm not sure if you're referring to me as a "cable guy", as I have stated here that I have not heard a difference between power cables, only that I believe it is possible, but I will answer your question.

 Yes, I am fully willing to admit that it is _conceivable_ that some of the differences "people" hear between cables are possibly due to placebo effect. 

 In fact I think it's highly likely.

 Now will you answer the question I directed at you?

 Do you believe that at some point in the range from "paper clips and rust" to "Valhalla" there IS an audible difference between cables?

 Yes or no?


----------



## stevenkelby

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_a subjective difference in sound occurs, granted not via placebo, if and only if there is an objective difference in sound._

 

Which is true even if we are currently unable to measure those differences objectively, yes?


----------



## Agnostic

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_a subjective difference in sound occurs, granted not via placebo and is in the same person under the same condition at the same time, if and only if there is an objective difference in sound._

 

Let me rephrase that: A subjective difference in sound is objective if it is objective.


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *stevenkelby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Which is true even if we are currently unable to measure those differences objectively, yes?_

 

assuming the subjective difference occurs within the same person, at the same time, under the same condition, and the person is not under the influence of placebo; then yes subjective difference is coupled with objective difference, which is to say subjective difference cannot occur unless there is an objective difference.


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Agnostic* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Let me rephrase that: A subjective difference in sound is objective if it is objective. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

this assertion doesn't make any sense.

 A is B if it is B or A is B if A is B or if it is B then A is B or if A is B then A is B? weird logic no matter how you look at it.


----------



## stevenkelby

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_assuming the subjective difference occurs within the same person, at the same time, under the same condition, and the person is not under the influence of placebo; then yes subjective difference is coupled with objective difference, which is to say subjective difference cannot occur unless there is an objective difference._

 

Right on.


----------



## infinitesymphony

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_assuming the subjective difference occurs within the same person, at the same time, under the same condition, and the person is not under the influence of placebo; then yes subjective difference is coupled with objective difference, which is to say subjective difference cannot occur unless there is an objective difference._

 

How can someone determine whether or not he is experiencing placebo? As long as we're talking about a single individual, anything observed by him is inherently subjective.

 Maybe I've misread some of the recent posts, but are there still people who believe that there are no measurable differences between cables? Or are we now at the point where the question becomes, at which point is a measurable difference audible?


----------



## stevenkelby

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *infinitesymphony* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_
 Maybe I've misread some of the recent posts, but are there still people who believe that there are no measurable differences between cables? Or are we now at the point where the question becomes, at which point is a measurable difference audible? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 



 Someone brought up Placebo again to avoid the tough questions, as would be expected of a true agnostic. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 That question again for those brave enough to answer (evidently not the Gnome or Agnostic:


 Do you believe that at some point in the range from "paper clips and rust" to "Valhalla" there IS an audible difference between cables?

 Yes or no?


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *stevenkelby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_can you provide evidence to define the point after which a cable will not affect the sound?_

 

Hate to say it, but that point would be the one at which noone in general would tell the cables apart in a statistically significant way at controlled DBTs.

 You would need to do such test starting with the paper clip cables vs. the highest-end ones and hopefully get them differenciated reliably by some people. Then move up the quality of the lower end cable higher, then repeat the test. Repeat this changing the lower end cable with a slightly higher quality one every time, until you reach cable X for which the people under test can't tell the difference reliably with respect to the highest end cable. That would be the point after which a cable will not affect the sound.

 This test would has several weak points that attackers would argue against:
 - Who decides what highest-end cable to use?
 - Who determines the sequence/ranking of lowest - to highest quality of cables to be tested?
 - What ears participated in the test? If you reach point X, someone can always argue the test didn't get higher because people in the test didn't have the right level of golden ears. (This is why people making claims about hearing the night and day differences between specific cables should be the ones to be tested.)


  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Chu* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The ultimate tool is still your ears. The problem is in your brain. We are incredibly weak versus suggestion and placebo (...)_

 

x2.

 Once again, just think about the Moon optical illusion. We tend to fall for it every single time, despite the fact that we have rational proof it looks no bigger at the horizon than when it's higher up in the sky. Our brains can be stubbornly deceitful. Keep in mind this illusion does not happen because of suggestion or placebo, it happens just because of how our brains are built to process the visual inputs. We shouldn't forget/ignore our weaknesses.


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *stevenkelby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Yes, excellent. I am glad you are brave enough to admit that at some stage there is a difference between cables! Now for the wanna-be scientists among us (particularly those I mentioned in my last post), here is my point:

 If you accept that at some point there is a difference between cables that do make a difference and those that don't (as Jon does), can you provide evidence to define the point after which a cable will not affect the sound? 

 Tell me, what are the minimum and maximum, measured, figures for a cable to be at a point where no further money spent will audibly affect the sound and why do you give those figures and not others?

 Can you do it? If not, the alternative is self evident, I think._

 

Fist of all these figures exist, I will not provide them you can do your search if you like, BJC have some of them on the website, comparing some cables, those are figures that the decent cable manufacturers, Belden, Canare, Mogami, and a few others use to select the cables and materials, to go further on that is just to empty your wallet and make profits...

 Guys just a question: what difference could a cable could possibly make, in a circuit that is stamped in a board, with regular cooper, soldered with tin and lead, in which sometimes those traces on the boards are ten times the size of the cables, or even worst in a circuit made soldered point to point using standard cooper cables??? It is the same as to get a cable replace a portion of it with a silver conductor and claim to hear differences...


 Now the believers have turned the things up side down (of course to their convenience as usual)...So now the skeptics have to prove the nonexistence of this differences, even while they do not hear any, how to prove what you do not belive exist, and also what you do not hear, a little paradoxical, eh?? So I have to prove something that does to exist to begin with...that is a good one...

 I have to prove that there is no OVNI's, how to prove that there is no life after death, how to prove that is life outside our knowledgeable limits...???

 I think that what has to be proved is what you claim that exists, otherwise it becomes a faith, and that is what faith exists...Welcome to voodoo...
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	






  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Patrick82* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Skeptics think audio is 0 and 1. They don't know that audio is analog. The AC power is analog because of the sinewaves. Skeptics think that the whole sinewave is inserted into the capacitor like a gas tank in a car. But only the top of the sinewave is used to charge the capacitor. As you can see at this site, you can change the sound by using a different sinewave shape and frequency. Using modified sinewaves with a power regenerator makes a bigger difference than power cords. I have used it for longer than aftermarket power cords.

 If you use a different thickness and material of the power cord, something changes but it is more subtle._

 

That is an incorrect assuption, and an incorrect logic (as usual) audio same as AC, is a form of AC, everybody knows that, it is not digital and I have nto seen any claim about that...the gas tank was an example to illustrate the way it works, simply as that... 

 What the skeptics claim is that an audio circuit works with DC, the circuit will not "see" nor use the AC form of energy to work, the device only uses it, to transform it in another kind of energy, DC that is usable for it. 

 If the PSU is well designed as all those waves, sines, squares, or whatever the shape is, perfect or not, will become a line, and will be as flat as posible, all those anomalies will be removed in that process as well, as they will be attenuated to a minimum, again not cero, but not bigger than the AC ripple that you will always have, so what is the use in trying to remove something that will be, if there is way of proving that indeed is there, below the value of the ripple???


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *infinitesymphony* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_How can someone determine whether or not he is experiencing placebo?_

 

'How' is a question of means and methods and is outside the scope of what I said

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *infinitesymphony* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_As long as we're talking about a single individual, anything observed by him is inherently subjective._

 

I have no problem with this one, which really doesn't do much to my theory.


----------



## stevenkelby

Quote:


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

 

You're exactly right of course. The point being that there IS a difference reached at some point , and no one can yet scientifically state where that point is. Therefore, it's entirely possible that a $100 cable and $1000 cable will sound different. Without further evidence, it's a false assumption to claim this is impossible, as some have claimed.


----------



## Agnostic

I give up. This is just a waste of time. Enjoy your super expensive power cables that have no proven or according to you even provable (because the differences you invested so much money in getting magically vanish in a puff of smoke when you start ABX'ing) quality increase over anything that can supply sufficient power to the attached appliance. 

 Amen!


----------



## infinitesymphony

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *stevenkelby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Do you believe that at some point in the range from "paper clips and rust" to "Valhalla" there IS an audible difference between cables?_

 

I think that most people here on Head-Fi would answer "yes," since there's enough objective proof to show that there are differences... Otherwise, why not use paper clips for all electrical connections?

 It seems to me that the question that the OP asked is more long the lines of, "Why _not_ use really expensive cables?"

 Everyone has their own answer for that: "I wouldn't be able to hear the difference," "I'd rather spend money on other equipment," "If a cable works at all, it's good enough," or "Go for it!"


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Guys just a question: what difference could a cable could posibly make, in a circuit that is stamped in a board, with regular cooper, soldered with tin and lead, in which sometimes those traces on the boards are ten times the size fo the cables, or evne worst in a curcuit made soldered point ot point using standard cooper cables??? It is the same as to get a cable replace a portion of it with a silver conductor and claim to hear differences..._

 

someone correct me if I am wrong. We can represent a single channel from the source to the amp as 2 thevenin/norton equivalent circuits and the connection or wire between them, although usually represented as a straight line, is actually a mini circuit all to itself. 

 Now, instead of drawing a straight line for Vin, we need to substitute that with a circuit involving RLC. Here is the tricky part, the RLC circuit for cable, wrt to the lumped wire model, is variable depending on the frequency of the signal, material property, and other quantum effects. Unless we know ALL the different effects external and internal elements can exert on the RLC in the model, we cannot fairly determine the effects of the cable.

 So the answer is RLC of a cable is what determines how it sounds, the questions is what the heck is the RLC and how do we measure and model it?

 If you replace every single wire (straight line) in a piece of electronics with lumped wire model, it would drive most circuit designers insane


----------



## stevenkelby

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Fist of all these figures exist, I will not provide them you can do your search if you like, BJC have some of them on the website, comparing some cables, those are figures that the decent cable manufacturers, Belden, Canare, Mogami, and a few others use to select the cables and materials, to go further on that is just to empty your wallet and make profits..._

 

Yeah I read those Sov, and they sounded perfectly reasonable to me. At least they admit that there ARE differences in cables, which is my whole point!


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *stevenkelby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Yeah I read those Sov, and they sounded perfectly reasonable to me. At least they admit that there ARE differences in cables, which is my whole point!_

 

There are differences in cable, that is fact, we can measure them...Now to what extend those differences can affect the sound to an extend that you and me, the common listeners, can hear them, that is the whole point...and I'm not talking of a gifted golden ears, that could, which BTW are extremelly rare and hard to find individuals, and they are not so common as we frequnetly see them here...we are talking of the comon individual like you or me...


----------



## stevenkelby

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *infinitesymphony* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I think that most people here on Head-Fi would answer "yes," since there's enough objective proof to show that there are differences... Otherwise, why not use paper clips for all electrical connections?

 It seems to me that the question that the OP asked is more long the lines of, "Why not use really expensive cables?"

 Everyone has their own answer for that: "I wouldn't be able to hear the difference," "I'd rather spend money on other equipment," "If a cable works at all, it's good enough," or "Go for it!"_

 

Yes well I think most people here would answer a question when it's asked of them.

 My issue is that the people who won't answer, refuse to do so because they know it will be a slippery slope to me demonstrating their foolishness for claiming that power cables make no difference, when clearly, at some point between paper clip and Valhalla, cables must make an audible difference. And at some point, they may stop making an audible difference.

 As no one can yet prove where these points are (BJC do make subjective claims, which sound good to me) so, and here's my final statement here (I'm bored with it now):

 It is wrong to say that there can be no audible differences between power cables.


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *stevenkelby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_As no one can yet prove where these points are (BJC do make subjective claims, which sound good to me) so, and here's my final statement here (I'm bored with it now):

 It is wrong to say that there can be no audible differences between power cables._

 

Well I think that they are not so subjecitve, if you look at them this way, they are on the cable business, and they could do a fancy power cord for a profit, I'm sure of that, and I'm sure we will buy it, they know how to do it, simply they feel that they will be cheating you, so they will not even attempt...that is IMO honesty...

 IMO it is wrong to say that a power cord will make any difference, it is all the opposite, and I do not feel embarrased at all, of telling you that I do not hear any difference while going from stock to any other I have tried...

 I think that there is another logic behind those claimed differences, there are individuals who claim to hear them becasue they are convinced of them, placebo, or real, I have nothing against those. But others are in just becasue they want to justify the money they have spent, instead of looking as fools in front of others eyes, and the third group the one who can not even afford them but are afraid of being called cloth ears, so they also hear them... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 those are the ones who annoy me...

 Everytime I hear a manufacturer talking about things like burn in of a switch, a cable, or a power cord, 400 hours to a cap to settle, or a circuit to settle, honestly I loose all respect for them...


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Marc303* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_your theory about the flow of electricity would be nice if electricity actually flowed.

 it is AC current and so basically stays in one place and vibrates_

 

Actually I wouldn't say it stays in one place. That vibration implies the electrons do flow in one direction and then in the opposite direction fast enough. Hence there is flow in both directions, only at different times, and at variating amplitudes.


 I thought of a possibly good analogy:

 AC -> *[power cord]* -> [Regulated Power Supply] -> [output DC wires] -> DC

 Water -> *[input pipe]* -> [Regulated Boiler system] -> [output pipe] -> constant pressure steam


 Imagine a boiler with a regulating pressure system that makes sure you get a very constant supply of steam in the output pipe. You get to feed water to this boiler all the time. Let's assume the boiler is always hot enough to boil the water.

 The constant pressure steam flowing out of this system would be equivalent to the DC coming out of a power supply, and the water entering the boiler would be somewhat analogous to the AC entering the power supply. The pipe bringing that water in would be analogous to the power cord.

 Water entering the boiler *will get transformed dramatically*; it will eventually get evaporated in the boiler, and *the regulator* will make sure the resulting steam comes out at an absolutely constant pressure through the output pipe. That is somewhat equivalent to what a good regulated power supply does: making sure the output DC voltage level is as constant as possible (flat) near a specific desired value, no matter how messed up the *(dramatically different)* oscillating input AC signal was before the transformation.

 In the boiler it doesn't really matter how the needed water got in: in buckets, through golden pipes with smooth walls, or through a twisted PVC pipe with muddy walls. A good boiler will filter that water, will boil it good, and *will have a good regulator* to guarantee and produce a constant pressure in the steam output. Same as the power supply with respect to the ouput DC voltage and current.

 All mechanisms inside the boiler of course have safe ranges of operations. Too much water/too much pressure and it can exceed the regulating capabilities of the regulating control system and explode. (Some boilers might have safety mechanisms to disable them before such levels, and some power supplies do as well.) Too little water/steam and the regulator won't cope with the low pressure, and the output steam pipe won't hold up to the promised specifications, will have less pressure than expected. Same happens with even the best power supplies, for example if the input AC drops below specific voltage levels for too long.

 But within reasonable operational ranges, it won't matter where the water comes from, how the water got in, or how the input pipe was, *the output steam will have constant pressure thanks to the effectiveness of the regulating mechanism -not so much thanks to the input pipe bringing the water in*. In principle, the same applies to power supplies. A good regulated power supply will make a dramatic transformation to the input AC, and will make sure the output DC is as flat and constant as possible regardless of how that AC got in, within some operational ranges of course.


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Actually I wouldn't say it stays in one place. That vibration implies the electrons do flow in one direction and then in the opposite direction fast enough. Hence there is flow in both directions, only at different times, and at variating amplitudes.


 I thought of a possibly good analogy:

 AC -> *[power cord]* -> [Regulated Power Supply] -> [output DC wires] -> DC

 Water -> *[input pipe]* -> [Regulated Boiler system] -> [output pipe] -> constant pressure steam_

 

analogy works fine for current, doesn't work for voltage. water through pipe does not generate wave. 

 in audio voltage and really the shape of the wave has as much to do with sound as the current; so dv/dt, di/dt and phasor (both real and imaginary) are all important (we need it calculate various components of the lumped wire model)


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_in audio voltage and really the shape of the wave has as much to do with sound as the current; so dv/dt, di/dt and d(phi)/dt (phasor) are all important (we need it calculate various components of the lumped wire model)_

 

Seems irrelevant to me. The regulated power supply produces simple DC, where there is no shape of any wave. We are not talking about the signal path here. We are talking about transforming AC into dead stable DC, and the possible effect of different power cords before that transformation.

 It is the job of the power supply to remove all AC ripples and AC factors that won't play any role, in fact are detrimental to clean constant DC.

 This is why I mentioned how dramatic the transformation inside the power supply was. Somewhat analogous to the dramatic transformation inside the boiler, between messy boiling liquid water (with waves and viscosity and whatnot) vs. floating vapor flowing smoothly at a constant pressure.


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Seems irrelevant to me. The regulated power supply produces simple DC, where there is no shape of any wave. We are not talking about the signal path here. We are talking about transforming AC into dead stable DC, and the possible effect of different power cords before that transformation.

 It is the job of the power supply to remove all AC ripples and AC factors that won't play any role, in fact are detrimental to clean constant DC.

 This is why I mentioned how dramatic the transformation inside the power supply was. Somewhat analogous to the dramatic transformation inside the boiler, between liquid water (with waves and viscosity and whatnot) vs. floating vapor flowing at a constant pressure._

 

if only life is perfect.


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_if only life is perfect._

 






 Your first seemed to have missed it, but now you seem to just openly avoid the point of the analogy.


 Anyway, it's there for whoever wants to ponder on it.


----------



## Assorted

Before this thread gets closed...

 Patrick is a great individual who's genuinely willing to help others getting the best sound with low cost tweaks. I was curious about ERS Paper, so I PMed Patrick and gave me all the info where to buy it, and how it should affect my portable equipment. 

 I'm really eager to try this tweak out.


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


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






 Your first seemed to have missed it, but now you seem to just openly avoid the point of the analogy.


 Anyway, it's there for whoever wants to ponder on it._

 

you are assuming input to the AC-DC circuit doesn't matter, but it does.

 circuits are much more complex than water boiler, that's why people pay big bucks for EE


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_you are assuming input to the AC-DC circuit doesn't matter, but it does._

 

I'm not. Just my mentioning the operational ranges shows that I'm not assuming such thing.

  Quote:


 circuits are much more complex than water boiler, that's why people pay big bucks for EE 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



 

Interesting rhetoric. Please indulge yourself in explaining the relevance of the "shape of the wave" and dv/dt, di/dt and phasors (both real and imaginary) in the DC ouput of the regulated power supply then.


----------



## meat01

Quote:


 Do you believe that at some point in the range from "paper clips and rust" to "Valhalla" there IS an audible difference between cables? 
 

As far as an interconnect goes, I will safely say that there is absolutely no audible difference between a bunch of soldered paper clips and a Vahalla, unless the Vahalla puts resistors and/or other components in their cables. If the Vahalla is just a cable, then no there is no audible difference between them.

 I can not say the same for an AC power cord, because I am not going to make a power cord out of paper clips. I feel there is minimum requirement with the wires to carry 110 volts or 220 volt at a certain current and as long as that minimum is met, it does not matter what the material is, as long as the same amount of current and voltage is being delivered.

 Has a different power cord ever made a a difference in TV picture quality? What about a computer, or an oscilloscope? Hmm, just an objective audio system huh?


----------



## earwicker7

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *outmatch* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_"The world is flat."
 "The sun revolves around the world."
 "Heavier objects fall down at faster rate than lighter ones."
 "Light is a form of wave and cannot be affected by gravitational force."
 "Time is an absolute quantity."

 That were all facts at a point in human's history.

 Anything not yet proved or disproved must not be assumed as a fact. Objectivity only exists in the rules you fabricated, such as 1+1 must equal 2.

 Discussing about cables is pointless, you cannot actually prove or disprove anything. You are trying to find absolutes in this relative universe._

 

x2

 I feel sorry for people so locked in to temperocentrism. "2007 is the most advanced the world has ever been. We know everything about audio, and over the next million years, we will discover nothing new!"


----------



## earwicker7

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *MrJoshua* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I've said this before, but how can the last metre of cable possibly change the electricity that's been flowing for potentially hundreds of miles over industrial grade cable, through sub-stations, into your house (which could have dubious wiring internally), through fuse/breaker boxes etc etc etc... I just cannot fathom how a cable, however well it's been braided and what fancypants conductor/dialetric it uses, could possibly improve on the transfer of energy from such an unpure source.

 It just boggles the mind!_

 

My opinion, and it's just that, is that as far as your system is concerned, the power cord isn't the last 6 feet, it's the first 6 feet.


----------



## earwicker7

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Agnostic* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_One last question to you "cable guys" before I stop wasting my time.

 Are any of you even willing to admit that it is conceivable that some of the differences you hear between cables are possibly due to placebo effect. (I'm not saying that that is what you hear, I'm asking is it even theoretically possible.)_

 

Of course, any rational person knows that ANYTHING is subject to placebo.

 So let's turn the tables a bit. Are you willing to admit the nocebo effect on people who have made up their minds about cables not making a difference? There have been documented cases of nocebo effect causing people to not be affected by strong pain medications that have plenty of objective proof of working and working well.


----------



## earwicker7

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Agnostic* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I give up. This is just a waste of time. Enjoy your super expensive power cables that have no proven or according to you even provable (because the differences you invested so much money in getting magically vanish in a puff of smoke when you start ABX'ing) quality increase over anything that can supply sufficient power to the attached appliance. 

 Amen! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

No problem. Keep enjoying your belief that an ipod is a viable source
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




.

 By the way, I'm agnostic myself. Agnostics question everything... even their own beliefs.


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *earwicker7* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_My opinion, and it's just that, is that as far as your system is concerned, the power cord isn't the last 6 feet, it's the first 6 feet._

 

No no no, those can certainly be the last 6 feet of a large audiophile-grade AC system


----------



## WindowsX

So this is a story between "Oh! No! It's too damn expensive for these little changes!" and "Well, these improvements worth my wallet!", right? I guess it's the same story as "Who would be crazy enough to spend over thousands just for music listening?" in common people's eyes.

 P.S. I'm sorry if this makes somebody sounds like they're cheap for audiophile wannabe but I just want to point out the truth that *You guys know it's not placebo but you can't sacrifice a lot of money (50-100, maybe) for little improvements you think that won't worth it and calling placebo will make you guys feel better*

 For people who read all these long pages and tried actual listening but still call it placebo, they should be marked as *LOSER*


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_This isn't problem about believer or non-believer but respect or no respect._

 

 Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_For people who read all these long pages and tried actual listening but still call it placebo, they should be marked as *LOSER*_

 

What a hypocrite you are.


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *earwicker7* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_There have been documented cases of nocebo effect causing people to not be affected by strong pain medications that have plenty of objective proof of working and working well._

 

You are referring to an active drug that results in a negative response. That doesn't really apply to nocebo. The correct use of the word "nocebo" allegedly refers to an *inert drug* or treatment that causes a harmful/negative response (the nocebo response) in the patient, as opposed to the beneficial/positive response (placebo response) associated to the also inert placebo drug. Depending on the case, one same inert drug can cause placebo and nocebo responses on different people.


----------



## fwojciec

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Assorted* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Before this thread gets closed..._

 

Why would this thread need to be closed? I don't think there is anything offensive about this thread, other than the fact that two well established fractions in this hobby exchange their ideas about audio here, and are not afraid to talk about some controversial and or even taboo issues. But it's not just a useless bickering, in either case, one can definitely sense that there is a point of contact between the two groups already, people listen to each other instead of just bashing each other, and are willing to look for points of contact between the two main positions represented, even if the debate gets a little heated at times. I think there are some important ideas that were mentioned in this thread, central to how one can enjoy audio as a hobby, and it is great that, to some extent at least, people are willing to explore those areas together in spite of their differences on some key points.


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *fwojciec* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Why would this thread need to be closed? I don't think there is anything offensive about this thread, other than the fact that two well established fractions in this hobby exchange their ideas about audio here, and are not afraid to talk about some controversial and or even taboo issues. But it's not just a useless bickering, in either case, one can definitely sense that there is a point of contact between the two groups already, people listen to each other instead of just bashing each other, and are willing to look for points of contact between the two main positions represented, even if the debate gets a little heated at times. I think there are some important ideas that were mentioned in this thread, central to how one can enjoy audio as a hobby, and it is great that, to some extent at least, people are willing to explore those areas together in spite of their differences on some key points._

 

x2


----------



## earwicker7

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You are referring to an active drug that results in a negative response. That doesn't really apply to nocebo. The correct use of the word "nocebo" allegedly refers to an *inert drug* or treatment that causes a harmful/negative response (the nocebo response) in the patient, as opposed to the beneficial/positive response (placebo response) associated to the also inert placebo drug. Depending on the case, one same inert drug can cause placebo and nocebo responses on different people._

 

Perhaps there is a different psychological vs pharmacological difference in the definition? I'm just telling you the way it was presented to me by my psych professor at the time (although it was a pyschological pharmacology class--d'oh!). Basically, what I got out of the prof was that this referred to people "unwilling" themselves from having effects from drugs... ie, "This drug won't do anything." Although there are actually physical changes going on in their body, they don't "feel" them and will deny they have any effect.

 Hope that clarifies what I'm getting at


----------



## earwicker7

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *fwojciec* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Why would this thread need to be closed? I don't think there is anything offensive about this thread, other than the fact that two well established fractions in this hobby exchange their ideas about audio here, and are not afraid to talk about some controversial and or even taboo issues. But it's not just a useless bickering, in either case, one can definitely sense that there is a point of contact between the two groups already, people listen to each other instead of just bashing each other, and are willing to look for points of contact between the two main positions represented, even if the debate gets a little heated at times. I think there are some important ideas that were mentioned in this thread, central to how one can enjoy audio as a hobby, and it is great that, to some extent at least, people are willing to explore those areas together in spite of their differences on some key points._

 

Thanks! It's good to hear someone I disagree with be open to discussion without "getting their feelings hurt". Kudos!


----------



## meat01

Quote:


 For people who read all these long pages and tried actual listening but still call it placebo, they should be marked as LOSER 
 

No need for the personal attacks and name calling. Let's discuss the issues, not the people.


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *earwicker7* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Hope that clarifies what I'm getting at
	

	
	
		
		

		
			



_

 

Yes it does. I think the use of placebo and nocebo in medicine is slightly different from the cognitive issues at stake here in audio.


 In simple terms, we do have drugs that cause a statistically significant positive effect on people, with certain secondary (usually undesired) effects. Research has also observed that people's inner beliefs affect their responses (e.g. the placebo and nocebo effects) even though the drugs administered are known to be completely inert.

 I think the scenario is slightly different in audio.

 We can't really measure the response on people with respect to audio. In medicine you can measure better health by several means (blood presure, white cell levels, cholesterol levels, immune system response levels, and thousands more). Plus you get the actual patients' verbal accounts on their response, how they feel. In audio, usually you just get what people tell you about what they hear, nothing else; except what you hear yourself. There is no objetive measure on their response (on our responses) to the audio signals.

 Also, in medicine you do carry out very precise experiments, even DBTs, with active drugs vs. inert drugs and tested vs. control groups etc., very carefully designed experimental tests, usually on a large scale, and large investments involved. This is not done in the audio world in any comparable way.

 In both scenarios, however, there are commonalities. The brain has been observed to play tricks on us in spite of ourselves. With same inputs, it has been observed that the brain tells us there are differences (e.g. Moon illusion), or the brain and body somehow actually cause changes in our responses (e.g. placebo and nocebo responses to inert drugs) despite the fact that the inputs are known to be the same, or known to be inert and not cause those different responses.

 With different cables that allegedly cause perceived audible differences, it is not clear where we stand. Measurements might say there are no differences in the cables, yet our brains (ears) might suggest they sound different. It is unclear where the cause of that perceived audible difference stands, whether in the cable or in our cognitive machinery, or partially on both.

 Anyway, just paraphrasing and thinking aloud.


----------



## fwojciec

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Patrick82* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_If you bang your head you get dizzy and then music sounds differently. 

 That's why quick A/B-ing of cables doesn't work because you need to bend under the table. The more quick A/B-ing you do the smaller the differences become because of fatigue. When I tested transports I eventually couldn't hear a difference at all, so I went to bed and slept. On the next day I heard huge differences._

 

If one needs to bang one's head and get dizzy to hear music differently then one is already greatly desensitized, and relies on only the strongest stimuli and therefore needs to go to great lengths... I'm a very practical person and that always seemed like a very unpractical approach to me 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 So my question is why do we need to rely solely on tweaking our equipment, when something like tweaking our own bodies, and by this I also mean what we subjectively, perhaps even creatively, bring to the enjoyment of music and audio equipment, is also possible?


----------



## WindowsX

Because I'm so sick of saying both minor changes and placebo at the same time. For me, placebo is in terms of "attacking" saying something that is good is just illusion. They even admitted it that it has difference but keep saying placebo really makes me sick so badly.

 Please pardon my out-bursted. I'm into high pressure situations a lot lately.


----------



## meat01

Placebo is just a fact of life. It is nothing to be ashamed of.


----------



## WindowsX

The fact is it's not placebo but some people are trying to claim it even though they admitted they found difference (probably little for them).


----------



## Logistics

I agree with the OP, that this attitude needs to stop. It's the same thing with the way I refuse to stop using my MDR-V700's, but people always clown on them and say they are garbage, and when I attempt to improve something about the systems I use, they won't help, but will instead just tell me my headphones are crap and to get something else. That's not fair.


----------



## Joey_V

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_[size=xx-large]*READ*[/size]

 P.S. Treating Patrick or some exceptions as stupid for spending 1k for cables is the same for non head-fier who treats you guys as stupid to spend a lot of money just for listening to music. You guys sure has reasons for those non head-fier as patrick has his reasons to you guys as well. And do you guys can accept that those non head-fiers call you "stupid" just to waste over hundreds or thousands for listening to music?_

 

You dont understand it... maybe cuz u've been here for too short a time.

 The reason people treat Patrick like the idiot that he is, is not because of the cables he purchases. It's because the guy is a complete nut who has long lost whatever credibility he has had with all his weird experiments, out-of-this-world ratings of like 1,000,000,000 TIMES better... only to realize that putting a book ontop of a marble rock makes it 1,000,000,000,000 TIMES better than before and so on...

 He has nothing to add to any forum he visits. Ask him why he is completely ridiculed on AVS forum, in addition to headfi.

 The guy is just plain odd.

 It's not his cables, it's his approach to audio that bothers people.

 YOU have to understand this fact before carrying on with your tirade.


----------



## Joey_V

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Logistics* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I agree with the OP, that this attitude needs to stop. It's the same thing with the way I refuse to stop using my MDR-V700's, but people always clown on them and say they are garbage, and when I attempt to improve something about the systems I use, they won't help, but will instead just tell me my headphones are crap and to get something else. That's not fair._

 

There's always bias in every community... the 700 just aren't headphones that are looked at kindly here at headfi. How is that unfair? We can't be allowed to have our opinions so we need to stop?

 You come here for our opinions, we tell you what it is and it's up to you to take it or not.

 There's nothing "not fair" about it.


----------



## Patrick82

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Joey_V* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You dont understand it... maybe cuz u've been here for too short a time.

 The reason people treat Patrick like the idiot that he is, is not because of the cables he purchases. It's because the guy is a complete nut who has long lost whatever credibility he has had with all his weird experiments, out-of-this-world ratings of like 1,000,000,000 TIMES better... only to realize that putting a book ontop of a marble rock makes it 1,000,000,000,000 TIMES better than before and so on..._

 

Here is my old improvement score list, I don't update it anymore because the improvements are too huge to fit into it.

My upgrades


 1 = Noticeable improvement
 10 = Night and day
 1 000 000+ = Unreal

_July 2005_

 Valhalla power cord for Krell KAV-500i = 15
 High Current Ultimate Outlet between wall and Power Plants = 5
 QuickSilver on everything = 15?
 QuickSilver on fuses = 2
 MultiWave II+ for source = 5
 xStream Statement between wall and Power Plants = *60*
 44.1 kHz to 768 kHz = 5
 MultiWave II and II+ for amp = 20
 Solid-Tech isolation = *100*
 QuickSilver GOLD upgrade = 5
 Valhalla between wall and Power Plants + hardwired = *60*
 Hifi-Tuning Gold fuse = 1
 Nordost Solar Wind 1 conductor + remove PCB = *220*
 Nordost Valkyrja 1 conductor = 140 (*360* compared to Stefan AudioArt)
 PS Audio GCC-100 = *200?*
 Cary 303/300 to DAC-1 = *500*
 Modded Valhalla power cord (2+2+1) for DAC1, and computer as transport (Valhalla and Power Plant) = *[size=small]5000[/size]*
 Computer to Cary transport. From 2 to 1 Power Plant. 2 conductor Valhalla power cord for amp. Extra isolation step. Cary from 3 to 0 isolation = -200 (less detail but more neutral?)
 Valhalla digital XLR = 5?
 Valhalla power cord 2 to 1 conductor for DAC1 = 100
 Valhalla power cord 3 to 2 conductors for Cary = 5
 Valkyrja internal wiring for CD player = 5
 Valkyrja speaker cable hardwire into PCB = 380
 Valkyrja input signal wire for amp, from 24 AWG to 22 AWG = -3
 Modded Valhalla interconnect 1 conductor = *[size=medium]1 000 000[/size]*
 Brilliant Pebbles Mini = 0.05
 Bypass fuses amp = 80
 Bypass fuses Cary transport = 2?
 Shortening Valhalla power cords = 1
 Disconnecting ground of DAC1 = 0.5?
 Valhalla power cord 2 to 1 conductors for Cary = 5
 Valhalla power cord 3 to 2 conductors for wall = 1
 4step to 5step isolation for DAC1 = *[size=small]1200[/size]*
 Hardwired into Power Plant = 5?
 ERS Paper full coverage = *[size=medium]2 000 000+[/size]*
 Valhalla interconnect XLR + hardwire = *[size=medium]1 300 000[/size]*
 Valhalla interconnect dedicated shield ground = *[size=medium]3 000 000[/size]*
 Noise Harvester + tweaks to compensate = *[size=medium]10 000 000[/size]*
 Power Plant Premier + Magix = *[size=x-large]1 000 000 000 000 000[/size]*
 2nd batch of ERS Paper, 1 conductor Valhalla mod for computer, Magix = *[size=xx-large]40 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000[/size]*

_February 2007_




  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Joey_V* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_He has nothing to add to any forum he visits. Ask him why he is completely ridiculed on AVS forum, in addition to headfi.

 The guy is just plain odd.

 It's not his cables, it's his approach to audio that bothers people.

 YOU have to understand this fact before carrying on with your tirade._

 

At least I don't want to strangle other audiophiles. http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?t=45979


----------



## fwojciec

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Joey_V* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You dont understand it... maybe cuz u've been here for too short a time.

 The reason people treat Patrick like the idiot that he is, is not because of the cables he purchases. It's because the guy is a complete nut who has long lost whatever credibility he has had with all his weird experiments, out-of-this-world ratings of like 1,000,000,000 TIMES better... only to realize that putting a book ontop of a marble rock makes it 1,000,000,000,000 TIMES better than before and so on...

 He has nothing to add to any forum he visits. Ask him why he is completely ridiculed on AVS forum, in addition to headfi.

 The guy is just plain odd.

 It's not his cables, it's his approach to audio that bothers people.

 YOU have to understand this fact before carrying on with your tirade._

 

The actual value of name calling in discussions has been already thoroughly debated in this thread.


----------



## LawnGnome

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Patrick82* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Here is my old improvement score list, I don't update it anymore because the improvements are too huge to fit into it.

My upgrades


 1 = Noticeable improvement
 10 = Night and day
 1 000 000+ = Unreal

July 2005

 Valhalla power cord for Krell KAV-500i = 15
 High Current Ultimate Outlet between wall and Power Plants = 5
 QuickSilver on everything = 15?
 QuickSilver on fuses = 2
 MultiWave II+ for source = 5
 xStream Statement between wall and Power Plants = *60*
 44.1 kHz to 768 kHz = 5
 MultiWave II and II+ for amp = 20
 Solid-Tech isolation = *100*
 QuickSilver GOLD upgrade = 5
 Valhalla between wall and Power Plants + hardwired = *60*
 Hifi-Tuning Gold fuse = 1
 Nordost Solar Wind 1 conductor + remove PCB = *220*
 Nordost Valkyrja 1 conductor = 140 (*360* compared to Stefan AudioArt)
 PS Audio GCC-100 = *200?*
 Cary 303/300 to DAC-1 = *500*
 Modded Valhalla power cord (2+2+1) for DAC1, and computer as transport (Valhalla and Power Plant) = *[size=small]5000[/size]*
 Computer to Cary transport. From 2 to 1 Power Plant. 2 conductor Valhalla power cord for amp. Extra isolation step. Cary from 3 to 0 isolation = -200 (less detail but more neutral?)
 Valhalla digital XLR = 5?
 Valhalla power cord 2 to 1 conductor for DAC1 = 100
 Valhalla power cord 3 to 2 conductors for Cary = 5
 Valkyrja internal wiring for CD player = 5
 Valkyrja speaker cable hardwire into PCB = 380
 Valkyrja input signal wire for amp, from 24 AWG to 22 AWG = -3
 Modded Valhalla interconnect 1 conductor = *[size=medium]1 000 000[/size]*
 Brilliant Pebbles Mini = 0.05
 Bypass fuses amp = 80
 Bypass fuses Cary transport = 2?
 Shortening Valhalla power cords = 1
 Disconnecting ground of DAC1 = 0.5?
 Valhalla power cord 2 to 1 conductors for Cary = 5
 Valhalla power cord 3 to 2 conductors for wall = 1
 4step to 5step isolation for DAC1 = *[size=small]1200[/size]*
 Hardwired into Power Plant = 5?
 ERS Paper full coverage = *[size=medium]2 000 000+[/size]*
 Valhalla interconnect XLR + hardwire = *[size=medium]1 300 000[/size]*
 Valhalla interconnect dedicated shield ground = *[size=medium]3 000 000[/size]*
 Noise Harvester + tweaks to compensate = *[size=medium]10 000 000[/size]*
 Power Plant Premier + Magix = *[size=x-large]1 000 000 000 000 000[/size]*
 2nd batch of ERS Paper, 1 conductor Valhalla mod for computer, Magix = *[size=xx-large]40 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000[/size]*

February 2007




 At least I don't want to strangle other audiophiles. http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?t=45979_

 



 How the hell can anyone not understand why patrick gets flak? Posting dumb useless crap like this for attention.


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I'm not. Just my mentioning the operational ranges shows that I'm not assuming such thing.



 Interesting rhetoric. Please indulge yourself in explaining the relevance of the "shape of the wave" and dv/dt, di/dt and phasors (both real and imaginary) in the DC ouput of the regulated power supply then. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

So you are saying input has no bearing on output?

 well..technically the input shouldn't matter because you should have atleast the isolation transformer to decouple input from output; But IIRC isolation transformer doesn't mess with the actual AC signal. So now you have now you have some input that's not just a simple Ae^jwt, but something else in the exponential. So does that extra thing matter in the AC-DC circuit?

 hehe..someone help me out here, it has been a long time since I did circuit analysis this complex. 

 Mr. Kevin Gilmore, please show us the derivation of Vo from Vi in a simple AC-DC converter with isolation transformer assuming Vin is a sawtooth wave of 60htz. 

 The other thing I have trouble calculating (on paper) is the harmonic component of a sawtooth wave and how that is translated from Vi to Vo. 

 <this is what happens to you when you had slept through most of your circuit classes thinking you are gonna be a digital designer> 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	







 In retrospect, I wish I had discovered this site when I was studying...I would be godly at analog circuit analysis and design by now


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *LawnGnome* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_How the hell can anyone not understand why patrick gets flak? Posting dumb useless crap like this for attention._

 

You need to know to read between the lines, so you are not obviously one of them. But i agree, those numbers are a bit exaggerated; he just tries to tell us that the tweaks with those huge figures made the biggest difference in his sytem. If he didn't do that and ony used 1 or 2%, then the sceptics would say anyway, you see, it's sooo small.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 So, his figures just show there is a clearly audible difference.

 There are still people in the middle. Not at both extremes!


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_So you are saying input has no bearing on output?

 well..technically the input shouldn't matter because you should have atleast the isolation transformer to decouple input from output; But IIRC isolation transformer doesn't mess with the actual AC signal. So now you have now you have some input that's not just a simple Ae^jwt, but something else in the exponential. So does that extra thing matter in the AC-DC circuit?

 hehe..someone help me out here, it has been a long time since I did circuit analysis this complex. 

 Mr. Kevin Gilmore, please show us the derivation of Vo from Vi in a simple AC-DC converter with isolation transformer assuming Vin is a sawtooth wave of 60htz. 

 The other thing I have trouble calculating (on paper) is the harmonic component of a sawtooth wave and how that is translated from Vi to Vo. 

 <this is what happens to you when you had slept through most of your circuit classes thinking you are gonna be a digital designer> 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	







 In retrospect, I wish I had discovered this site when I was studying...I would be godly at analog circuit analysis and design by now 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

Smoothing caps in the powersection of an amp have huge impact on sound quality! The better the filtering, the cleaner the DC is for use in the amp itself.


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_assuming Vin is a sawtooth wave of 60htz._

 

Why would you assume such an input, a sawtooth wave? No power cord will smooth that out anyway, so what are you aiming at? We are talking about normal operating ranges. Check the analogy again and let's stay on point, about the possible impact the power cord might have before an AC-DC regulated power supply.


----------



## LawnGnome

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Smoothing caps in the powersection of an amp have huge impact on sound quality! The better the filtering, the cleaner the DC is for use in the amp itself._

 

Yeah, but thats after the AC is converted to DC and still has some ripple from the regulator. So yes power caps can have a large impact. I know they made a big difference for me with my portaphile and tread.

 But I think they are talking about the AC line before its converted to DC.

 Dirty DC can really muck up the sound.

 But a decent power supply can produce great DC with even the dirtiest AC lines.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *LawnGnome* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Yeah, but thats after the AC is converted to DC and still has some ripple from the regulator. So yes power caps can have a large impact. I know they made a big difference for me with my portaphile and tread.

 But I think they are talking about the AC line before its converted to DC.

 Dirty DC can really muck up the sound.

 But a decent power supply can produce great DC with even the dirtiest AC lines._

 

Well, i had a good powersection, but after the mod, it was much better, still.

 The only thing you can do before the filtering in the amp is to use an external passive filter or to use a regenerating powerplant. The latter one being most expensive.

 I found out that after the mod, using the passive filter gave worse sound. I lost detail. So, the filtering in the amp is clearly better. Before forking out mucho dinero on filters, i would put my money towards a mod.
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 So, apperently, the filtering in the powersection of the amp is more efficient then passive filters.


----------



## fwojciec

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You need to know to read between the lines, so you are not obviously one of them. But i agree, those numbers are a bit exaggerated; he just tries to tell us that the tweaks with those huge figures made the biggest difference in his sytem. If he didn't do that and ony used 1 or 2%, then the sceptics would say anyway, you see, it's sooo small.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 So, his figures just show there is a clearly audible difference.

 There are still people in the middle. Not at both extremes!_

 

Or his posts are meant to ridicule a certain tendency in high-end audio hobby, to exaggerate it to the point where it becomes unbelievable, absurd, almost artistically distorted. 

 In a way Patrick's opinions are so finely attuned to generating controversy that they are, in principle, capable of outraging believers and skeptics equally.


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Why would you assume such an input, a sawtooth wave? No power cord will smooth that out anyway, so what are you aiming at? We are talking about normal operating ranges. Check the analogy again and let's stay on point, about the possible impact the power cord might have before an AC-DC regulated power supply._

 

I am trying to figure out how the shape of the wave effect the Vo. And whether the additional harmonics of the input have any effects on the output.

 You like to make analogies, I just think making comparison between AC-DC converter and water boiler is a little elementary as in you fail to account for effects of various elements of the circuit have on the final output. 

 But even if you insist on working with black box model and assume black box is perfect, I still don't think you can make a fair comparison. 

 My reasoning is 1) Unlike water, electron does not flow, 2) unlike the boiler that is doing work on the water molecules, circuit is not doing work on the electrons, 3) The kind of energy that powers the boiler has little or no effect on the steam, yet the quality of Vdd, Vss effects the circuit performance and the output, 4) There is a specific point when steam is generated (>100C at sea level), but there is no specific point when DC is generated, and 5) all steam are identical (H20 molecule in gas form), but all DC generated are not equal (DC can be generated at different voltage).

 So as you can see steam and DC are fundamentally different and cannot be used to make reasonable analogies.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *fwojciec* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Or his posts are meant to ridicule a certain tendency in high-end audio hobby, to exaggerate it to the point where it becomes unbelievable, absurd, almost artistically distorted. 

 In a way Patrick's opinions are so finely attuned to generating controversy that they are, in principle, capable of outraging believers and skeptics equally._

 

As far as i know patrick, he surely wants to state that those tweaks made a huge impact on sound. Not to be sarcastic. But a more down to earth aproach would probably be more understandable to the mayority of head-fi.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I am trying to figure out how the shape of the wave effect the Vo. And whether the additional harmonics of the input have any effects on the output.

 You like to make analogies, I just think making comparison between AC-DC converter and water boiler is a little elementary as in you fail to account for effects of various elements of the circuit have on the final output. 

 But even if you insist on working with black box model and assume black box is perfect, I still don't think you can make a fair comparison. 

 My reasoning is 1) Unlike water, electron does not flow, 2) unlike the boiler that is doing work on the water molecules, circuit is not doing work on the electrons, 3) The kind of energy that powers the boiler has little or no effect on the steam, yet the quality of Vdd, Vss effects the circuit performance and the output, 4) There is a specific point when steam is generated (>100C at sea level), but there is no specific point when DC is generated, and 5) all steam are identical (H20 molecule in gas form), but all DC generated are not equal (DC can be generated at different voltage).

 So as you can see steam and DC are fundamentally different and cannot be used to make reasonable analogies._

 

Switching powercords had quite an impact on the sound of the amplifier.

 going from stock cable to a very good custom made copper cable made quite an impact, cleaner sound and more detail. I also have a high end silverplated cable and between the silverplated and the pure copper cable is still quite a difference in sound. It is easally audible on my system.

 It's a bit more complicated then that, you have to take into the equation; the differences in insulator, core (copper, silver, silverplated copper), crystal structure etc.

 Steam is just steam, it doesn't have all these variables like a powercable has!


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I just think making comparison between AC-DC converter and water boiler is a little elementary 

 So as you can see steam and DC are fundamentally different and cannot be used to make reasonable analogies._

 

Incredibly, you think it´s elementary and you failed to address the main point of the analogy. Of course steam and DC are very different things, and producing constant pressure vapor vs. producing stable DC are very different processes. The point of the analogy was to show how little impact the carrier of the inputs (pipe in the steamer, power cord in the power supply) might have in the overall quality of the output. This very essence of the analogy you have failed to address so far.


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Switching powercords had quite an impact on the sound of the amplifier.

 going from stock cable to a very good custom made copper cable made quite an impact, cleaner sound and more detail. I also have a high end silverplated cable and between the silverplated and the pure copper cable is still quite a difference in sound. It is easally audible on my system.

 It's a bit more complicated then that, you have to take into the equation; the differences in insulator, core (copper, silver, silverplated copper), crystal structure etc.

 Steam is just steam, it doesn't have all these variables like a powercable has!_

 

 Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Incredibly, you think it´s elementary and you failed to address the main point of the analogy. Of course steam and DC are very different things. The point of the analogy was to show how little impact the carrier of the inputs (pipe in the steamer, power cord in the power supply) might have in the overall quality of the output. This very essence of the analogy you have failed to address so far._

 

The very idea of comparing raw iron pipe where water _*flows*_ through and a wire that is the medium where electrical energy _*propagate*_ through cannot be more different.

 Flow and propagation are 2 completely different concepts. When a wave is propagating through a medium, the interaction of the wave and the medium is extremely important. OTOH, the interaction between the substance that's flown through a conduit and the conduit itself is not so important.

 <not to be rude, I assume you have at least some kind of science/engineering degree so we can carry on an intelligent discussion on this matter>


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *LawnGnome* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_But a decent power supply can produce great DC with even the dirtiest AC lines._

 

Exactly. The caps in a power supply can certainly affect the ouput, because they are part of the *regulatory mechanism*, making sure the output stays constant. Different capacitors in the power supply (or different regulatory circuits as a whole) certainly might have a larger impact in the output DC than a different power cord before the power supply.

 I think a power cord might have a perceivable impact only if the power supply is poorly built, and only in rather noisy environments. Granted that between the AC outlet and the power supply in a noisy environment, full of EMI and RFI, one power cord might bring dirtier AC (to this poorly power supply in the first place) than, for instance, a shielded power cord.


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The very idea of comparing raw iron pipe where water *flows* through and a wire that is the medium where electrical energy *propagate* through cannot be more different_

 

And you keep failing to see that the dramatic transformation going on after that part of the system, and the control mechanism keeping track of the stability of the output, is what makes that input part largely irrelevant; on both systems.

 Anyway, I think the analogy is worthy, and once again, it´s there for anyone interested to ponder on it. Obviously it wasn´t just for you; don't waste your time on it if it doesn´t clarify anything to you.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I assume you have at least some kind of science/engineering degree_

 

You ought to check people´s public profiles when arguing with them wondering about their education.


----------



## fwojciec

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The very idea of comparing raw iron pipe where water *flows* through and a wire that is the medium where electrical energy *propagate* through cannot be more different.

 Flow and propagation are 2 completely different concepts. When a wave is propagating through a medium, the interaction of the wave and the medium is extremely important. OTOH, the interaction between the substance that's flown through a conduit and the conduit itself is not so important._

 

What's so different between the abstractions of "flow" or "propagation" that would render rsaavedra's analogy inappropriate? He merely shows that, in principle, a transfer and the resulting output can be regulated by a regulatory mechanism. He is not concerned with particular material properties of electricity or water, but with the design principle involved.


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_And you keep failing to see that the dramatic transformation going on after that part of the system, and the control mechanism keeping track of the stability of the output, is what makes that input part largely irrelevant, on both systems.

 Anyway, I think the analogy is worthy, and once again, it´s there for anyone interested to ponder on it. Obviously it wasn´t just for you; don't waste your time on it if it doesn´t clarify anything to you._

 

ok..now we want to look at the control theory behind both cases. But unfortunately, even under the control theory, both black boxes cannot be fairly compared, let alone draw any meaningful analogy from it. 

 The concept of a boiler that keeps a constant pressure of steam necessitates the use of negative feedback in the control scheme. It is impossible to maintain the output unless one employs a negative feedback control.

 OTOH, AC-DC circuit does not need to have a negative feedback control to regulate the DC output. 

 You have 2 systems one must have a negative feedback, the other does not necessarily need negative feedback; to say a negative feedback system is comparable to a system with no negative feedback wrt to the control system is purely unwarranted.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You ought to check people´s public profiles when arguing with them wondering about their education._

 

I am sorry computer science, as in programming, has no bearing on circuit design, circuit analysis; and I assume you have not gone through any rigorous training in circuits and emag. I can't program so I respect you nevertheless. 

 Now I see where you are coming up with these analogies. In computer science, and computer engineering, people like to make up analogies to better understand the architecture, e.g. FIFO, OOO engine, reshuffle buffer, etc. we EE don't usually like to make analogies, because it doesn't make any sense in the analog circuit design.


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *fwojciec* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_What's so different between the abstractions of "flow" or "propagation" that would render rsaavedra's analogy inappropriate? He merely shows that, in principle, a transfer and the resulting output can be regulated by a regulatory mechanism. He is not concerned with particular material properties of electricity or water, but with the design principle involved._

 

because one is a wave, the other is not.


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I am sorry computer science, as in programming, has no bearing on circuit design, circuit analysis; and I assume you have not gone through any rigorous training in circuits and emag. I can't program so I respect you nevertheless._

 

I´m the one who is sorry, but your talking about waves and other wave related things in the output DC suggested your background in electronics is pretty "rusty" to say the least.

 And you made wrong assumptions. I did take a course on electronics and circuit design and circuit analysis. Granted, doesn´t mean I'm deeply knowledgeable about it though, as many others here truly are. That was quite a while ago, and I have no clear idea why the Dynahi is better than other circuits for instance. Right now I wouldn´t dare to present any circuit of my own that could even challenge a Cmoy 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 That doesn´t disqualify the analogy in any way, in my humble opinion. On the other hand, you keep ignoring the essence of the analogy, and you are not explaining how a different power cord could indeed have a large impact in the quality of the output DC of a regulated power supply.

 To bring back some argumentation terms, your questioning my background seems like a desperate measure, seems it's leaning toward Ad Hominen, rather than addressing the arguments under discussion. When this happens it makes little sense to keep arguing.


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I´m sorry, but your talking about waves and other wave related things in the output DC suggested your background in electronics is pretty "rusty" to say the least._

 

The idea of DC is just a concept. you always have some fluctuations no matter what, which means there are always some harmonic components in the DC. 

 my analog skill is quite 'rusty' compared to when I graduated; I mean rusty as in I can no longer calculate what I need to calculate on paper, but the concepts are still there and I still remember how to run SPICE 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 Not to direct this toward you, but to challenge/to impeach a person's credibility and credential is an effective way to disqualify the statements made by that person. 

 So in your case, all I am trying to do is to show that a person with programming background, granted have taken a few circuit classes, do not possess the knowledge to intelligently talk about issues that's fairly advanced in the realm of electrical engineering/analog circuit design.


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_my analog skill is quite 'rusty' compared to when I graduated;_

 

No kidding... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_do not possess the knowledge to intelligently talk about issues that's fairly advanced in the realm of electrical engineering/analog circuit design._

 

And you do think you posses such knowledge? Hmm... And while you exercise all your (also rusty) rhetorical tactics, you have indeed failed to attack the essense of the analogy.

 It's obvious where your argumentation is heading with ad hominem + avoiding to talk about the issues at stake, so I´m moving my attention to more worthy arguers and forum members.


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_No kidding... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 And with all your (also rusty) rhetorical tactics, you have indeed failed to attack the essense of the analogy._

 

now you are just cherry picking your arguments. if you gaze over a crowd of people you can always pick out your friend.


----------



## fwojciec

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Not to direct this toward you, but to challenge/to impeach a person's credibility and credential is an effective way to disqualify the statements made by that person. 

 So in your case, all I am trying to do is to show that a person with programming background, granted have taken several circuit classes, do not possess the knowledge to intelligently talk about issues that's fairly advanced in the realm of electrical engineering/analog circuit design._

 

This is also a logical fallacy called ad hominem argument, you have defined it almost perfectly, it is an error because it proposes that referring to the personal characteristics of someone that makes a claim is sufficient for demonstrating that the claim itself is invalid. 

 It has no merit other than its rhetorical effect. It is only an effective method of argumentation when people don't know better and allow their emotions to dictate their judgments.


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *fwojciec* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_This is also a logical fallacy called ad hominem argument, you have defined it almost perfectly, it is an error because it proposes that referring to the personal characteristics of someone that makes a claim is sufficient for demonstrating that the claim itself is invalid. _

 

x2

 Now I will sound like exercising ad hominem against Cheesebert, but not the case, just a general comment.

 Depth and breadth in technical knowledge are necessary, but not sufficient to make up a good scientist. It´s truly sad that so many "technical" people have such poor argumentative and methodological background.

 Even without technical knowledge you can have intelligent arguments and conversations, because good arguments help people share and refine their knowledge. It´s without a minimum of argumentative skills that you really can´t have intelligent conversations.


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *fwojciec* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_This is also a logical fallacy called ad hominem argument, you have defined it almost perfectly, it is an error because it proposes that referring to the personal characteristics of someone that makes a claim is sufficient for demonstrating that the claim itself is invalid. 

 It has no merit other than its rhetorical effect. It is only an effective method of argumentation when people don't know better and allow their emotions to dictate their judgments._

 

so with that said, how do you counter a person's argument when the person is not knowledgeable, or not sufficient knowledgeable about the topic he is arguing. What I said is not quite ad hominem, because his knowledge is the key to the arguments he makes; and any lacking of a specific knowledge disqualifies the person to make such an argument.


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_so with that said, how do you counter a person's argument when the person is not knowledgeable, or not sufficient knowledgeable about the topic he is arguing._

 

You address the argument, and not the person making the argument.


----------



## fwojciec

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_so with that said, how do you counter a person's argument when the person is not knowledgeable, or not sufficient knowledgeable about the topic he is arguing. What I said is not quite ad hominem, because his knowledge is the key to the arguments he makes; and any lacking of a specific knowledge disqualifies the person to make such an argument._

 

One should always address the claim itself not the character of the person who makes it. If the person is indeed ignorant it should be easy to demonstrate that their claims (in themselves) don't make a whole lot of sense, are somehow inconsistent. In either case we can't simply assume that they are incompetent - and thus wrong.


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *fwojciec* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_One should always address the claim itself not the character of the person who makes it. If the person is indeed ignorant it should be easy to demonstrate that their claims (in themselves) don't make a whole lot of sense, are somehow inconsistent. In either case we can't simply assume that they are incompetent - and thus wrong._

 

not in character (most of headfi are good, smart, and caring people), but in the credentials from which one draws her arguments, unless what you are saying is credential or knowledge is irrelevant in our arguments.


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_so with that said, how do you counter a person's argument when the person is not knowledgeable, or not sufficient knowledgeable about the topic he is arguing._

 

Will rephrase a statement I made earlier; will now say that it's narrowmindedness, self delusional and patronizing attitudes, and lack of a minimum of argumentative skills that prevent people from having intelligent conversations.


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You address the argument, and not the person making the argument._

 

I didn't want to take the time to draw the proper analogies and make the proper distinctions between EE and CS.


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Will rephrase a statement I made earlier; will now say that it's narrowmindedness, self delusional and patronizing attitudes, and lack of a minimum of argumentative skills that prevent people from having intelligent conversations._

 

I don't agree. I think its valid to impeach the person making the arguments.


----------



## Febs

Quote:


 I didn't want to take the time to draw the proper analogies and make the proper distinctions between EE and CS. 
 

 You're still completely missing the point. Address the *substance *of his arguments, and not his credentials.


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I think its valid to impeach the person making the arguments._

 

While you claim that I have no knowledge of electronics to support my analogy, your own electronics statements exude slopinness, and your ignorance on basic argumentation gets the more baffling with every word you submit.

 The fact that you resort to attacking the person can only show your utter inability to pinpoint what's wrong with the statements in the argument you are trying to attack.


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You're still completely missing the point. Address the *substance *of his arguments, and not his credentials._

 

I certanly did, if you just go back several pages. I laid out a path that distinguishes the analogies the opponent made from several points: 1)difference between electron and water 2) difference between wave and non-wave (water vs electrical energy), 3) difference between DC and steam, 4) difference between the control system in AC-DC vs boiler, and 5) difference in the methods one would use to approach such problem.

 It is my opinion that these differences effectively voids the analogies between the AC-DC system and the boiler.


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_1)difference between electron and water 2) difference between wave and non-wave (water vs electrical energy), 3) difference between DC and steam, 4) difference between the control system in AC-DC vs boiler, and 5) difference in the methods one would use to approach such problem._

 

And how about putting aside all of that which is irrelevant, and addressing the essence of the analogy...
	

	
	
		
		

		
			









 6) The input path is largely irrelevant given the major transformation of the input taking place afterwards, and given the regulatory mechanisms working to make sure the output remains as stable as possible.


 I'm moving on to other threads and posters really, bye bye.


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_While you claim that I have no knowledge of electronics to support my analogy, your own electronics statements exude slopinness, and your ignorance on basic argumentation gets the more baffling with every word you submit._

 

now you are making up facts

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The fact that you resort to attacking the person can only show your utter inability to pinpoint what's wrong with the statements in the argument you are trying to attack._

 

your failure to address my arguments substantively is what lead me to question your credentials; I am certainly not questioning your intelligence or your character.


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_And how about putting aside all of that which is irrelevant, and addressing the essence of the analogy...
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	








 6) The input path is largely irrelevant given the major transformation of the input taking place afterwards, and given the regulatory mechanisms working to make sure the output remains as stable as possible.


 I'm moving on to other threads and posters really, bye bye._

 

Its hard for me to make arguments when the thing I am trying to argue against is a moving target. What you are trying to do is to accomplish something indirectly (making inaccurate analogies) what you cannot do directly (demonstrate variance on Vi has no effect on Vo).


----------



## fwojciec

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_not in character (most of headfi are good, smart, and caring people), but in the credentials from which one draws her arguments, unless what you are saying is credential or knowledge is irrelevant in our arguments._

 

Another means of generating useful discussion, it seems to me, is to exercise something like a good will and actually make an effort to empathize with another person's opinion, to try to understand where they are coming from and not to hesitate to state points of mutual agreement.

 For example, I can say something like this: I see where you're coming from with the credibility problem, which is in a sense something very real. I for example always have a similar reaction to how it is done on television, where I am presented with a talking head, who is also served to me as an expert in a field of X, and whose opinions I am to take with due seriousness. I do think that this entire dynamic plays out very differently, however, with a medium such as an internet forum. Here individuals have an opportunity to create their own credibility by consistently presenting an attitude which might make me, for example, read their posts seriously - not merely because I am told that they are "experts" and have "credentials," but because I recognize and respect the effort they put in posting their thoughts.

 This is becoming too much like some meta-discussion about discussing at the moment


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Its hard for me to make arguments when the thing I am trying to argue against is a moving target._

 






 Where has your "target" moved? The essence of my analogy hasn't moved one bit since I wrote it. If you misunderstood things, that's your problem.

 Read my analogy and subsequent posts again if you care to waste your time that way. Go back, do your homework before you argue carelessly and aimlessly. Then try to explain where the essence of my analogy (which you seem to have ignored all alone) has "moved". Then we can probably keep chatting. Cheers!


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *fwojciec* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Another means of generating useful discussion, it seems to me, is to exercise something like a good will and actually make an effort to emphasize with another person's opinion, to try to understand where they are coming from and not to hesitate to state points of mutual agreement.

 For example, I can say something like this: I see where you're coming from with the credibility problem, which is in a sense something very real. I for example always have a similar reaction to how it is done on television, where I am presented with a talking head, who is also served to me as an expert in a field of X, and whose opinions I am to take with due seriousness. I do think that this entire dynamic plays out very differently, however, with a medium such as an internet forum. Here individuals have an opportunity to create their own credibility by consistently presenting an attitude which might make me, for example, read their posts seriously - not merely because I am told that they are "experts" and have "credentials," but because I recognize and respect the effort they put in posting their thoughts.

 This is becoming too much like some meta-discussion about discussing at the moment 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

I know where the analogie came from, which I try to allude to in one of my previous threads; he/she is trying to apply methodology used in computer science to an application in analog circuit design; not saying all analogies in circuit designs are invalid, it's just so happen that the analogy made in this thread doesn't make any sense. I also make analogies when it is appropriate to make analogies.


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_so with that said, how do you counter a person's argument when the person is not knowledgeable, or not sufficient knowledgeable about the topic he is arguing._

 

That's easy. You argue on point and present clear evidence that counters his. There's no certification process to make someone qualified to comment. We're judged instead by the way we back up our opinions.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_he/she is trying to apply methodology used in computer science to an application in analog circuit design;_

 

I'm a he. And you are making up things shamelessly. I didn't use any specific methodology; it's just a simple analogy I thought of. But I'm curious, what methodology in CS could you name that you think I used after all?


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The point of the analogy was to show how little impact the carrier of the inputs (pipe in the steamer, power cord in the power supply) might have in the overall quality of the output. This very essence of the analogy you have failed to address so far._

 

 Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_And how about putting aside all of that which is irrelevant, and addressing the essence of the analogy...
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	








 6) The input path is largely irrelevant given the major transformation of the input taking place afterwards, and given the regulatory mechanisms working to make sure the output remains as stable as possible._

 

I qualify that as a moving target.


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *meat01* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Placebo is just a fact of life. It is nothing to be ashamed of._

 

It is not a thing to be ashamed of, and also IMO is a very good thing if it makes you happy. For example, in medicine it is considiered in all tests of new drugs, so it is real, and responsible for a lot of miraculous cures, and part of life in general, not sure why people always try to ignore it while applied to audio ...


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I qualify that as a moving target._

 

Of course, only if you fail to see that they address the very same issue, which you haven't addressed in either verbal form I expressed it with.


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I'm a he. And you are making up things shamelessly. I'm didn't use any specific methodology; it's just a simple analogy I thought of. But I'm curious, what methodology in CS could you name that you think I used after all?_

 

making analogies between a concept/algorithm and something we understand in the real world. granted, some ee stuff, especially emag uses analogies to understand certain concepts, but generally analogies are not used in ee, IIRC.


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_making analogies between a concept/algorithm and something we understand in the real world._

 

So my hunch was right, you are making up things shamelessly.


----------



## Logistics

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Joey_V* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_There's always bias in every community... the 700 just aren't headphones that are looked at kindly here at headfi. How is that unfair? We can't be allowed to have our opinions so we need to stop?

 You come here for our opinions, we tell you what it is and it's up to you to take it or not.

 There's nothing "not fair" about it._

 

I didn't ask for anyone's opinion of my headphones. I gathered they don't care for them from other threads. But having someone refuse to help you improve something about your rig because they end in a particular pair of headphones is absolute garbage. That's like someone refusing to teach you how to change your oil because they don't like your car.


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Of course, only if you fail to see that they address the very same issue, which you haven't addressed in either verbal form I expressed it with._

 

 Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The point of the analogy was to show how little impact the carrier of the inputs (pipe in the steamer, power cord in the power supply) might have in the overall quality of the output. This very essence of the analogy you have failed to address so far._

 

 Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_And how about putting aside all of that which is irrelevant, and addressing the essence of the analogy...
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	








 6) The input path is largely irrelevant given the major transformation of the input taking place afterwards, and given the regulatory mechanisms working to make sure the output remains as stable as possible._

 

same issue? really? how so?


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_So my hunch was right, you are making up things shamelessly._

 

no need to get nasty.


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_same issue? really? how so?_

 

Where do you see the difference that makes the target "move"?


----------



## fwojciec

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_same issue? really? how so?_

 

I can confirm that, as far as I understand the argument, the quotes all seem to refer to what I understand to be the gist of rsaavedra's analogy - the analogy which I myself consider effective and agree with, BTW. Well, in the first quote it doesn't actually say anything about what it concerns, but only refers to it as such, the second quote sort of distills it to its most pertinent feature, and the third one restates the argument again and gives a reasoning behind it.


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *fwojciec* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I can confirm that, as far as I understand the argument, the quotes all seem to refer to what I understand to be the gist of rsaavedra's analogy - the analogy which I myself consider effective and agree with, BTW. Well, in the first quote it doesn't actually say anything about what it concerns, but only refers to it as such, the second quote sort of distills it to its most pertinent feature, and the third one restates the argument again and gives a reasoning behind it._

 

I expressly pointed out, had we lived in a perfect world, the analogy between a boiler and AC-DC, both as black boxes, would work; alas life isn't so simple; conceptual equivalence is not the same as equivalence in practice.


----------



## rsaavedra

And since you have so "keen" an eye for criticizing my analogies, here's a gift for you to have fun with:

 The analogy in this thread: Regulated power supply and regulated boiler system.

 Analogy comparing Electricity and Water Flow.

 Analogy between Hearing differences in audio components and Spotting differences between dvd players.

 Analogy explaining that "Brightness" is different from "Detail."

 Analogy To counter the claim "bringing dead threads to life is bad practice."

 Analogy between Wearing a fake watch and Driving a fake sports car.

 Analogy explaining that jitter might be related to copied cds possibly sounding better than originals.

 Analogy Between Sound and Video, with respect to high-end vs. typical/standard level equipment.


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *fwojciec* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I can confirm that, as far as I understand the argument, the quotes all seem to refer to what I understand to be the gist of rsaavedra's analogy - the analogy which I myself consider effective and agree with, BTW. Well, in the first quote it doesn't actually say anything about what it concerns, but only refers to it as such, the second quote sort of distills it to its most pertinent feature, and the third one restates the argument again and gives a reasoning behind it._

 

Thanks very much! Some times I question the clarity of my English, but posts like yours bring back my confidence on getting my points across.


----------



## fwojciec

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I expressly pointed out, had we lived in a perfect world, the analogy between a boiler and AC-DC, both as black boxes, would work; alas life isn't so simple; conceptual equivalence is not the same as equivalence in practice._

 

Even if the fact that we don't live in the perfect world, or that "alas life isn't so simple" somehow automatically invalidated all arguments, what you are saying would probably not disprove what rsaavedra actually means to say by using his analogy. You are attacking the aptitude of the analogy as an illustration, but you are not actually addressing the claim that his analogy is trying to illustrate.


----------



## Patrick82

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *LawnGnome* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_How the hell can anyone not understand why patrick gets flak? Posting dumb useless crap like this for attention._

 

I didn't just make up random numbers for my improvements, it took a long time finding the accurate numbers. When you tweak your system you get a bigger improvement than your previous tweak because the system gets more revealing. But that doesn't mean the latest tweak makes a bigger improvement than the first. 

 Probably modifying the interconnect into 1 conductor per signal makes the biggest improvement out of all the tweaks right now, because there was a big jump from 5000 to 1 000 000 score. The improvement was 200 times bigger than anything else I heard before, the improvement was so unreal I thought something was broken. It sounded like each frequency were coming from separate audio systems and speakers. Everything was very distinct. I thought I was getting distortion but I was hearing small sharp transients which previously used to be smooth sounds.

 2nd batch of ERS Paper + 3rd batch of Magix levitation feet made a bigger improvement, it was impossible not to hear it. The difference between amps and DACs makes one of the smallest differences in my system, only the flavor changes but there aren't any real improvements. Tweaks give real improvements because they fix something.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Exactly. The caps in a power supply can certainly affect the ouput, because they are part of the *regulatory mechanism*, making sure the output stays constant. Different capacitors in the power supply (or different regulatory circuits as a whole) certainly might have a larger impact in the output DC than a different power cord before the power supply.

 I think a power cord might have a perceivable impact only if the power supply is poorly built, and only in rather noisy environments. Granted that between the AC outlet and the power supply in a noisy environment, full of EMI and RFI, one power cord might bring dirtier AC (to this poorly power supply in the first place) than, for instance, a shielded power cord._

 

Yes, i am with you on this one. A good regulated powersupply in your amp makes alot of a difference to the sound. The better the dc gets, the better the amp will sound. Simple as that. It is even more important it seems then the filtering of AC line! If you still need a filter, then your powersupply in your amp might not up to the task.

 I removed the shielding from my powercable; it sounds better, not as dark and mudded, but clear and fresh with more details.

 There is still a very distinct difference in sound between the copper cable and the silverplated copper cable. And they both improve the sound considderably over the stock cable.


----------



## Zorander

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_There is still a very distinct difference in sound between the copper cable and the silverplated copper cable. And they both improve the sound considderably over the stock cable._

 

Pretty sure stock cables are copper too.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Zorander* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Pretty sure stock cables are copper too. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

Yes, but it didn't sound as good as the high end copper cable though.


----------



## kpeezy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Icarium* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You guys do realize that not only does WindowsX believe in cables (Something I believe in myself), but he advocates and supports spending more on cables than on the rest of your rig (Source/Amp/Headphones). 

 I quote him from his previous thread:
 "I can say with confidence that 1600$ amp + 2400$ cables gives better sound than 3000$ amp + 400$ cables in terms of hi-fi sound."

 from http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showpo...40&postcount=9

 I'm not going to say he's insane... but I'd love if he recognized that his opinion is just HIS opinion and not some sort of truth that the rest of us are blind to._

 

Thank you, thank you, thank you. I'm so tired of reading WindowsX's posts because every one I stumble across is something like this one. Maybe I'm just getting unlucky.


----------



## Agnostic

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Thanks very much! Some times I question the clarity of my English, but posts like yours bring back my confidence on getting my points across._

 

Stop wasting your excellent argumentative skills. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I mean we've come to the point that someone refuses to adress the point of a possibly useful analogy while not offering ANY reason why input AC would meanigfully affect the DC part of an audio circuit or how that little piece of cable from the wall to the equipment improves the AC. I mean HE is attacking you ad hominem for making an argument against his cable claim while he doesn't even have a POSSIBLE EXPLANATION how the AC would affect the DC, or the sound quality!!

 The proposition: Power cables affect sound quality:
 1. Nobody has offered any rational let alone scientifically plausible theory how this could work.
 2. All claims are based on what people say they hear. This does not prove anything as there is no need whatsoever for an objective change for a subjective change in experience to occur.
 3. The only meanigful test that exists: ABX'ing somehow magically doesn't work when it comes to cables. All ABX tests show that people hear no difference.
 4. The discussion ends up in cable "believers" attacking people that sum up the above arguments and arguing about the validity of all the evidence which speaks against the cable voodoo claims. Meanwhile there is still no explanation how there could even BE a difference let alone any proof that there IS a difference. 
 5 Hence, unless anyone offers proof or at the very, VERY least a viable, scientifically reasonable theory of HOW this magical change in sound quality occurs, this whole discussion is pointless because basically there is NOTHING TO DISCUSS. (even a good theory would not be methodologically sufficient because we have a better theory that's supported by evidence: placebo)


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Agnostic* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Stop wasting your excellent argumentative skills. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I mean we've come to the point that someone refuses to adress the point of a possibly useful analogy while not offering ANY reason why input AC would meanigfully affect the DC part of an audio circuit or how that little piece of cable from the wall to the equipment improves the AC. I mean HE is attacking you ad hominem for making an argument against his cable claim while he doesn't even have a POSSIBLE EXPLANATION how the AC would affect the DC, or the sound quality!!

 The proposition: Power cables affect sound quality:
 1. Nobody has offered any rational let alone scientifically plausible theory how this could work.
 2. All claims are based on what people say they hear. This does not prove anything as there is no need whatsoever for an objective change for a subjective change in experience to occur.
 3. The only meanigful test that exists: ABX'ing somehow magically doesn't work when it comes to cables. All ABX tests show that people hear no difference.
 4. The discussion ends up in cable "believers" attacking people that sum up the above arguments and arguing about the validity of all the evidence which speaks against the cable voodoo claims. Meanwhile there is still no explanation how there could even BE a difference let alone any proof that there IS a difference. 
 5 Hence, unless anyone offers proof or at the very, VERY least a viable, scientifically reasonable theory of HOW this magical change in sound quality occurs, this whole discussion is pointless because basically there is NOTHING TO DISCUSS. (even a good theory would not be methodologically sufficient because we have a better theory that's supported by evidence: placebo)




_

 

The only placebo is *your* fact that there are no differences between cables. And i provided lots of evidence that there are differences between cables in other threads.


----------



## Agnostic

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The only placebo is *your* fact that there are no differences between cables. And i provided lots of evidence that there are differences between cables in other threads._

 

5. Hence, unless anyone offers proof or at the very, VERY least a viable, scientifically reasonable theory of HOW this magical change in sound quality occurs, this whole discussion is pointless because basically there is NOTHING TO DISCUSS.

 Differences in cables do not even begin to answer this question. Just like the property of redness does not affect the speed of the same type car as opposed to a green one. (except perceptually of course, everyone knows red cars are WAY faster! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




)
 Please answer this question otherwise there is nothing to discuss.
 Show me the money!


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Agnostic* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_5. Hence, unless anyone offers proof or at the very, VERY least a viable, scientifically reasonable theory of HOW this magical change in sound quality occurs, this whole discussion is pointless because basically there is NOTHING TO DISCUSS.

 Differences in cables do not even begin to answer this question. Just like the property of redness does not affect the speed of the same type car as opposed to a green one. (except perceptually of course, everyone knows red cars are WAY faster! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





)
 Please answer this question otherwise there is nothing to discuss.
 Show me the money! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

You might wanna read this thread.
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=259716


----------



## Agnostic

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You might wanna read this thread.
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=259716_

 

That's a very long thread, the first and last page of which contain the same unfounded claims I have found here. If it contains any viable theories or proof I'm sure you could just post them here instead of making me go through an enormous thread full of the same nonsense I've already read in this one.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Agnostic* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_That's a very long thread, the first and last page of which contain the same unfounded claims I have found here. If it contains any viable theories or proof I'm sure you could just post them here instead of making me go through an enormous thread full of the same nonsense I've already read in this one._

 

That's why you need to read all pages! You cannot make a conclusion by reading the first or last page!

 Typical lazy behaviour of a sceptic, let the others prove it..........


----------



## Agnostic

Uh ok, now i have to do your work for you? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



 Shall I just convince myself of believing in your unfounded claims as well? Would that please you? 

 Superfluously: I already have a viable theory supported by evidence. You are the one that doesn't.
 So once more:
 [size=large]*Show me the money!*[/size]


----------



## WindowsX

cheat code won't work for battle.net...lol


----------



## Patrick82

The same things are said in every cable thread but the skeptics easily forget, and they just keep on going. What would happen if they compare cables? They forget how it sounds like. They are also too lazy to listen for more than a few minutes.

 They have already made up their minds and are too lazy to try anything. Then they post in forums and say that the believers have placebo, because it makes the skeptics feel better about themselves.


----------



## fwojciec

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Patrick82* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The same things are said in every cable thread but the skeptics easily forget, and they just keep on going. What would happen if they compare cables? They forget how it sounds like. They are also too lazy to listen for more than a few minutes.

 They have already made up their minds and are too lazy to try anything. Then they post in forums and say that the believers have placebo, because it makes the skeptics feel better about themselves._

 

What the skeptics primarily oppose, it seems to me, is the idea that one should spend thousands of dollars on paying for something which is, for all we know, a purely psychological indulgence. It is in this context that the claims about the direct relationship between monetary value of a cable and some subjectively experienced "improvement" appear as naturally suspect to them. 

 And insofar that the numbers that you give seek to quantify a purely subjective experience, your numbers seem somehow appropriate to me, especially the very large ones.


----------



## Wmcmanus

This thread has turned into the same old nonsense with 2 camps espousing diametrically opposite points of views and not listening to each other. 

 When this sort of childish chest pounding tripe takes over and substitutes for a well reasoned, intelligent and respectable discussion, there is only one question left to ask: 

 Does the sound of yet another gridlocked cable discussion thread falling in the woods _really_ make a sound?


----------



## Wmcmanus

Ehhh, I changed my mind and reopened the thread. If you guys want to keep beating yourselves up, Fight Club style, be my guest. I just seems silly to me, but maybe you think something can be accomplished by this.


----------



## jonnywolfet

i look forward to when threads are not derailed by the endless cable arguments. i end up ignoring so many threads simply because i know that my comment will go un-noticed, un-read and un-replied to because of all the crap being slung.

 please stop it guys, its really really old now.

 thanks


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Agnostic* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_3. The only meanigful test that exists: ABX'ing somehow magically doesn't work when it comes to cables. All ABX tests show that people hear no difference._

 

While I am an advocate of ABX testing, I think that we need to be careful not to overstate what ABX tests show. A "failed" ABX test does not prove that people hear no difference. It simply means that it was not established that the participants did in fact hear a difference. This is a subtle distinction, but as we (rightfully) point out the logical fallacies in the arguments of others, we should not fall into the fallacy of claiming that the failure to prove a positive is proof of the negative.


----------



## fwojciec

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *jonnywolfet* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_i look forward to when threads are not derailed by the endless cable arguments. i end up ignoring so many threads simply because i know that my comment will go un-noticed, un-read and un-replied to because of all the crap being slung.

 please stop it guys, its really really old now.

 thanks_

 

That is not likely to stop anytime soon, and it is not because of some dark conspiracy against your posts, but because it is an issue on which people are very polarized.

 And saying things like "crap being slung" is not very nice, especially here, I guess.


----------



## LawnGnome

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Agnostic* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_That's a very long thread, the first and last page of which contain the same unfounded claims I have found here. If it contains any viable theories or proof I'm sure you could just post them here instead of making me go through an enormous thread full of the same nonsense I've already read in this one._

 

There is nothing of use in that thread. Just back and forth like this one, with believers not posting any real evidence.


----------



## Agnostic

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_While I am an advocate of ABX testing, I think that we need to be careful not to overstate what ABX tests show. A "failed" ABX test does not prove that people hear no difference. It simply means that it was not established that the participants did in fact hear a difference. This is a subtle distinction, but as we (rightfully) point out the logical fallacies in the arguments of others, we should not fall into the fallacy of claiming that the failure to prove a positive is proof of the negative._

 

I agree completely. I am not claiming that this proves there is no objective difference. I merely pointed out that there is neither a theory explaining how differences could be objective nor any evidence to support such a theory if it existed. 

 Currently there *is* a theory that *does* explain the differences and that *has* evidence to support it and this theory says there is no objective difference. Proper scientific methodology for the people believing in the objective cable difference claim would be to provide a theory that explaines this difference and then provide means of testing it. As long as they don't all we have is an unfounded claim.


----------



## Agnostic

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *LawnGnome* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_There is nothing of use in that thread. Just back and forth like this one, with believers not posting any real evidence._

 

Thanks for confirming that. I surmised as much. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Anyway, it's kind of absurd and desperate to expect someone to start looking for proof of something he has no reason to believe in in the first place like Tourmaline did. Next time someone tells me cows fly at night or eating dog **** cures colds I'd better start looking for evidence those claims are true as well, otherwise I'm just a "lazy skeptic".


----------



## WindowsX

Believer, that made me laugh. Let me say that it's placebo that different headphones cause different sound with such no evidence from you guys. I can conclude like this following cables' logic. How amutherish you are, saying no difference because your ears aren't good enough while scientific can prove the difference. I dare you to try recording music from speaker or headphone to microphone with cables changing recording and see if it will sound different when show FR.


----------



## Febs

It's easy to find documentation that different headphones have substantially different responses within the audible range. For example:







 Can you point me to any similar information with respect to the frequency responses of two different brands of copper cables?


----------



## Jahn

let's go back to the original post in this thread for a second. the OP asked head-fiers not to call Patrick crazy because he likes those pricey valhalla cables.

 believe me, those cables aren't the reason why Patrick has that "crazy" rep. if it were, you might as well lock up half of the members here. just do a search if you have time on all of his posts NOT having to do with a valhalla discussion and I think you'll see a trend, that's all i'll add.

 and personally, i do have cables that cost more than rat shack ones in my rig, and i think they do a good job. i don't expect head-fiers to 100% agree with that, but a "crazy" rep is built on more than cable selection here on these boards.


----------



## vcoheda

just close the entire cable section of the forum. would be better in the long run and would save valuable band width for more important comments, like what are you listening to now.


----------



## fwojciec

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *vcoheda* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_just close the entire cable section of the forum. would be better in the long run and would save valuable band width for more important comments, like what are you listening to now._

 

The whole purpose of this section of the forum is for these discussions to take place here rather than elsewhere on the forums - it is a way of filtering cable discussions away from the other traffic so that those who are not interested in it can have means of avoiding it.


----------



## Agnostic

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Believer, that made me laugh. Let me say that it's placebo that different headphones cause different sound with such no evidence from you guys. I can conclude like this following cables' logic. How amutherish you are, saying no difference because your ears aren't good enough while scientific can prove the difference. I dare you to try recording music from speaker or headphone to microphone with cables changing recording and see if it will sound different when show FR._

 

There is a viable theory for differences in sound between headphones. There isn't one for power cables. 

 You are the one making claims. That means you have to provide the *theory* and supporting _*evidence*_. 
 I'll just keep repeating it until I see at least one, or better, both of the above:
_*Show me the money!!!!!*_


----------



## LawnGnome

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *vcoheda* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_just close the entire cable section of the forum. would be better in the long run and would save valuable band width for more important comments, like what are you listening to now._

 

Please share the way in which you decided who's opinions and on what topic and worthwhile, and those that are not.

 These topics have large traffic because people want to discuss them. It is related to audio in many many ways. 

 You do not have have reason to say people shouldn't talk about it.


----------



## earwicker7

There should be a relatively simple way to solve this, although I personally don't have the equipment to do so.

 I don't remember the name of it, but I know there is software out there that can compare two signals and "subtract" one from the other to see the difference. Actually, it's not just seeing the difference, as it also generates an audio file of the difference. For example, if you played a track with a seriously faulty stock power cord that causes hum and then played the same track with a working version of the same cord, the audio file would basically be only the sound of the hum itself.

 Simple test--wire a system with stock power cords and interconnects, play a test track, then wire the same system with Nordost or Shunyata or some similar company's top of the line products, play a test track and then see what the software generates. If there is ANY audible sound on the generated file, it's case closed and we can stop these stupid arguments.

 Anyone up for this? Again, I don't remember the name of the software, but I'm positive someone on this forum has to know what I'm talking about.


----------



## Agnostic

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *earwicker7* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_There should be a relatively simple way to solve this, although I personally don't have the equipment to do so.

 I don't remember the name of it, but I know there is software out there that can compare two signals and "subtract" one from the other to see the difference. Actually, it's not just seeing the difference, as it also generates an audio file of the difference. For example, if you played a track with a seriously faulty stock power cord that causes hum and then played the same track with a working version of the same cord, the audio file would basically be only the sound of the hum itself.

 Simple test--wire a system with stock power cords and interconnects, play a test track, then wire the same system with Nordost or Shunyata or some similar company's top of the line products, play a test track and then see what the software generates. If there is ANY audible sound on the generated file, it's case closed and we can stop these stupid arguments.

 Anyone up for this? Again, I don't remember the name of the software, but I'm positive someone on this forum has to know what I'm talking about._

 

That would be interesting to see, though even assuming you find a difference it would only prove half of the claim: that there is an objective difference in the audio signal; not that it's an audible difference.

 Still it would be great to see that experiment, preferably performed by someone who is independent or with more than one person present to assure valid testing and the test setup should be rigorously analyzed to assure it is only testing what it's supposed to test.


----------



## Agnostic

For one, there should be several tests:
 1. comparing two files using the same cable to make sure the difference is not just generated by variables in the rest of the system.
 2. comparing two different stock cables to show that the difference is not somehow incidental and therefore unrelated to claimed cable quality.
 3. stock to high quality.

 If you find a similar difference in test 1 or 2 or both as in test 3 the test is not a valid test of the claimed cable quality.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_It's easy to find documentation that different headphones have substantially different responses within the audible range. For example:






 Can you point me to any similar information with respect to the frequency responses of two different brands of copper cables?_

 


 yes, i can , both cans use copper cable and look at the graphs, they are quite different. Need more evidence.


----------



## infinitesymphony

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_yes, i can , both cans use copper cable and look at the graphs, they are quite different. Need more evidence.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

C'mon, let's keep the responses logical. Those are graphs of the frequency response of two entirely different headphones.

 Here's an idea similar to what earwicker7 and Agnostic suggested using headphones as the testing medium. Take a pair of headphones with a stock and a boutique audio cable and measure the frequency response of the headphones with both. If there is a difference, it will be shown in the graph.

 The same could be done using headphones and swapping out other interconnects earlier in the chain.


----------



## Agnostic

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_yes, i can , both cans use copper cable and look at the graphs, they are quite different. Need more evidence.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

You keep insisting of making a fool of yourself with nonsensical arguments don't you? I guess you already realized this is nonsense and are just being bloody minded, but anyway: The difference is explained by different drivers. Even exactly identical copper cables could therefore have produced that graph. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



 Do you have anything more substantial to contribute?


----------



## Agnostic

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *infinitesymphony* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_C'mon, let's keep the responses logical. Those are graphs of the frequency response of two entirely different headphones.

 Here's an idea similar to what earwicker7 and Agnostic suggested using headphones as the testing medium. Take a pair of headphones with a stock and a boutique audio cable and measure the frequency response of the headphones with both. If there is a difference, it will be shown in the graph.

 The same could be done using headphones and swapping out other interconnects earlier in the chain._

 

That's another option good option. The same methodological constrictions I already mentioned would apply:

 1. measuring two times using the same cable to make sure the difference is not just generated by variables in the rest of the system.
 2. comparing two different stock cables to show that the difference is not somehow incidental and therefore unrelated to claimed cable quality.
 3. stock to high quality.

 If you find a similar difference in test 1 or 2 or both as in test 3 the test is not a valid test of the claimed cable quality.


----------



## Patrick82

Isn't it better to spend the time listening to music than read/write posts in this thread? It's like you are car racing and you argue about which gas to use, and then the race is over before you made your decision.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Agnostic* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You keep insisting of making a fool of yourself with nonsensical arguments don't you? I guess you already realized this is nonsense and are just being bloody minded, but anyway: The difference is explained by different drivers. Even exactly identical copper cables could therefore have produced that graph. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




 Do you have anything more substantial to contribute?_

 

Funny, i was thinking about you the same way, reading the first and last page of a thread that explains it all. By refusing so, you show you're not interested in really learning something but just tr*ll.

 I was just being sarcastic, as you sceptics usually are. So, a taste of your own medicine doesn't taste as good as you thought it would be huh?!

 I haven't seen any substantial contribution from you lately.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 P.s.

 You're problem is: there are NO two copper cables the same!
 And i published the figures in cable threads, so spend some time reading those.


----------



## Agnostic

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Patrick82* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Isn't it better to spend the time listening to music than read/write posts in this thread? It's like you are car racing and you argue about which gas to use, and then the race is over before you made your decision._

 

Oh now we should just stop discussing the thing altogether. Getting nervous someone might actually test something? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




  Quote:


 Funny, i was thinking about you the same way, reading the first and last page of a thread that explains it all. By refusing so, you show you're not interested in really learning something but just tr*ll.

 I was just being sarcastic, as you sceptics usually are. So, a taste of your own medicine doesn't taste as good as you thought it would be huh?!

 I haven't seen any substantial contribution from you lately.

 P.s.

 You're problem is: there are NO two copper cables the same!
 And i published the figures in cable threads, so spend some time reading those. 
 

I never said two copper cables are exactly the same. I said: if they had been you would still have heard a difference. You keep attacking me over things I never said. Doesn't really convince me to take you more seriously.
*[size=xx-small]show me the money buddy......please![/size]*


----------



## LawnGnome

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Patrick82* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Isn't it better to spend the time listening to music than read/write posts in this thread? It's like you are car racing and you argue about which gas to use, and then the race is over before you made your decision._

 

Funny you use this analogy. 

 Because in the professional car racing world. Much MUCH more time is spent researching and testing the car, than actually racing it.

 They run many simulations and do a lot of research to find the best configuration. BUT, they also do research to keep the costs down while keeping the high performance.


----------



## LawnGnome

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Funny, i was thinking about you the same way, reading the first and last page of a thread that explains it all. By refusing so, you show you're not interested in really learning something but just tr*ll.

 I was just being sarcastic, as you sceptics usually are. So, a taste of your own medicine doesn't taste as good as you thought it would be huh?!

 I haven't seen any substantial contribution from you lately.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 P.s.

 You're problem is: there are NO two copper cables the same!
 And i published the figures in cable threads, so spend some time reading those._

 

Quit calling people trolls.

 This is name calling and a personal attack, as well as flamebaiting. All of which are prohibited in the forum rules.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Agnostic* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Oh now we should just stop discussing the thing altogether. Getting nervous someone might actually test something? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	






*[size=xx-small]show me the money buddy......please![/size]*



_

 

I posted the link, reading is up to you. This time not the first and last page, but especially the pages in between.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *LawnGnome* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Quit calling people trolls.

 This is name calling and a personal attack, as well as flamebaiting. All of which are prohibited in the forum rules._

 

He did it first, just a natural responce. You had your share in the other cable thread, didn't you?! You were very close of being banned, as was bigshot.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *LawnGnome* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Quit calling people trolls.

 This is name calling and a personal attack, as well as flamebaiting. All of which are prohibited in the forum rules._

 

read this?!

 "You keep insisting of making a *fool of yourself with nonsensical arguments *don't you? I guess you already realized this is nonsense and are just *being bloody minded*,"

 Someone who *refuses* to read a *whole thread *to get some *insites* is a troll to me, if interested he would spend the time to read it.


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *infinitesymphony* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_C'mon, let's keep the responses logical. Those are graphs of the frequency response of two entirely different headphones.

 Here's an idea similar to what earwicker7 and Agnostic suggested using headphones as the testing medium. Take a pair of headphones with a stock and a boutique audio cable and measure the frequency response of the headphones with both. If there is a difference, it will be shown in the graph.

 The same could be done using headphones and swapping out other interconnects earlier in the chain._

 

this would accomplish nothing. Any reasonably well made cable of a reasonable length with reasonable gauge that satisfies the application the cable is used for, has min effect on FR in the time domain and impulse response will result in essentially the same harmonic content. Assuming you are using the equipment that's commercially available.

 Now..then how do you measure the difference in cables? 
 is FFT the answer? 
 is FFT accurate enough? 
 If you don't use FFT, then what?
 Do you test the cable at all fundamental frequencies? (the lumped wire model is frequency dependent)
 Do you test the cable with a complex frequency?
 Do you test the cable with frequency that's changing over time?
*How do you measure a system (cable as a system) that's not linear and time invariant?* <- I think this is the hardest test, this actually only solves the problem of viewing cable as a filter; what about as circuit with the same non linear and time variant value for RLC? ...... I do not have the knowledge to analysis this nor know a way to test it; but _maybe some one do!_

 More questions than answers. No company will spend the money to R&D (building different cable and try to hear a difference is not R&D in my book), no intellectually component researcher will waste their time/money to solve these problem. The audio cable discussion shall forever be a back and forth bickering of believer and nonbeliever.


----------



## Agnostic

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_He did it first, just a natural responce. you had your share in the other cable thread, didn't you?!_

 

I never called you a troll. I just said you made nonsensical arguments. And regarding your claims about evidence you say is "somewhere over in another thread", if it's there why not post it here? You are the one trying to prove your claims. Why would I start looking for evidence of some unfounded claim you make if you don't even want top take the small trouble of posting the info here in this thread where we are having the discussion? It rather appears to me that you are not just to lazy to post this so called evidence here but that you are not providing it because it's imaginary. Prove me wrong.
 Show me the money!


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_this would accomplish nothing. Any reasonably well made cable of a reasonable length with reasonable gauge that satisfies the application the cable is used for, has min effect on FR in the time domain and impulse response will result in essentially the same harmonic content. Assuming you are using the equipment that's commercially available.

 Now..then how do you measure the difference in cables? 
 is FFT the answer? 
 is FFT accurate enough? 
 If you don't use FFT, then what?
 Do you test the cable at all fundamental frequencies? (the lumped wire model is frequency dependent)
 Do you test the cable with a complex frequency?
 Do you test the cable with frequency that's changing over time?
 How do you measure a system (cable as a system) that's not linear and time invariant?

 More questions than answers. No company will spend the money to R&D (building different cable and try to hear a difference is not R&D in my book), no intellectually component researcher will waste their time/money to solve these problem. The audio cable discussion shall forever be a back and forth bickering of believer and nonbeliever._

 

True.

 As much scientific evidence they come up with, i can counterattack it with at least as much scientific evidence. Even the scientists are devided, engeneers are devided and the users of cables are devided.

 And if my reading abilty is still in tact, this *cable disussion *is big time *OFF TOPIC!*


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Agnostic* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I never called you a troll. I just said you made nonsensical arguments. And regarding your claims about evidence you say is "somewhere over in another thread", if it's there why not post it here? You are the one trying to prove your claims. Why would I start looking for evidence of some unfounded claim you make if you don't even want top take the small trouble of posting the info here in this thread where we are having the discussion? It rather appears to me that you are not just to lazy to post this so called evidence here but that you are not providing it because it's imaginary. Prove me wrong.
 Show me the money! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 


 I showed the money many times, over and over, all you have to do is click on that link and read.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Why do you refuse to read the thread?! It just appears to me that YOU are to lazy to read it yourself!

 You wasted enough time in here, in that exact period of time you could have read several pages allready!


----------



## Agnostic

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_True.

 As much scientific evidence they come up with, i can counterattack it with at least as much scientific evidence. Even the scientists are devided, engeneers are devided and the users of cables are devided.

 And if my reading abilty is still in tact, this *cable disussion *is big time *OFF TOPIC!*_

 

Which evidence? The evidence "over in the other thread" somewhere?

 Well, I'm going to bed. Maybe one of you can show me some money tomorrow? So far I haven't seen a dime.


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Agnostic* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Which evidence? The evidence "over in the other thread" somewhere?

 Well, I'm going to bed. Maybe one of you can show me some money tomorrow? So far I haven't seen a dime. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

Actually, if you read the other thread, you'll find many, many examples of Tourmaline making claims about something that was said in yet another thread, me asking him for the link, and him refusing to provide it.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Agnostic* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Which evidence? The evidence "over in the other thread" somewhere?

 Well, I'm going to bed. Maybe one of you can show me some money tomorrow? So far I haven't seen a dime. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

Neither from you, your posts are not even worth a dime.

 Don't act like you're innocent:

 ""You keep insisting of making a fool of yourself with nonsensical arguments don't you? I guess you already realized this is nonsense and are just being bloody minded,"

 This IS a personal attack and not very nice, if i am still understanding some English!

 You, see, he still refuses to read the whole thread, instead he tried to trick me into reading the whole thread and paste it in here, who's lazy huh?!


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Actually, if you read the other thread, you'll find many, many examples of Tourmaline making claims about something that was said in yet another thread, me asking him for the link, and him refusing to provide it._

 

BigShot actually provided the link, i pasted it into the thread but it wasn't something you liked, That's probably why you can't remember?!
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 It was the link about the figures of differences between cables, if i recall correctly! It is still in there. read it.


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_this would accomplish nothing. Any reasonably well made cable of a reasonable length with reasonable gauge that satisfies the application the cable is used for, has min effect on FR in the time domain and impulse response will result in essentially the same harmonic content. Assuming you are using the equipment that's commercially available._

 

While I suspect that you are correct, it would be very interesting to see the frequency response chart of say, the HD650 with a stock cable compared to the same HD650 with one of the aftermarket cables that is supposed to make a clear difference. I wonder if we could get the folks at Headroom to run their set of graphs with an aftermarket cable?


----------



## Agnostic

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Actually, if you read the other thread, you'll find many, many examples of Tourmaline making claims about something that was said in yet another thread, me asking him for the link, and him refusing to provide it._

 

Ah so he tried that trick before as well huh? If you have evidence you provide it, or you make an exact reference. That's sound scientific method. If you don't want to provide evidence you say you have, or refuse to make an exact reference you are basically just proving your inability to take part in a serious discussion. 

 I'll stop asking you to show the money Tourmaline, it seems you're not just plain broke but actually completely bankrupt.


----------



## tourmaline

This is the *last time *i am doing the "dirty" work for the lazy sceptics, who cannot read an entire thread but just the first and last page and state there's nothing interesting in there!


 "Speaker cables and interconnects represent one of the most controversial subjects in audio/video. Do they make a difference in the quality of the signal being passed from one component to another? Are they worth the price? You will find audiophiles of all degrees of experience and expertise answering these two questions with yes's and no's. Why the controversy? At least part of the answer lies in what we have been told, rather than what we have heard for ourselves. Secondly, it is difficult to define precisely what to listen for when comparing cables, and third, any particular cable may sound quite different with one set of equipment than with another.

 During the last year, we began researching some of these questions for ourselves, believing at the outset that cables probably did not make any truly noticeable improvement in sound quality. We were wrong in our assumption, and how!

 Cables do make a difference, and in order to see why, it is first necessary to understand the characteristics that affect their ability to transmit a signal.

 The "personality" of a cable is determined by three basic electrical properties: resistance, capacitance, and inductance. Resistance is probably the smallest factor, because cables use good conductors (copper and silver). The real culprits in cable transmission are capacitance, measured in picofarads or pF (trillionths of a farad) per foot, and inductance, measured in microhenrys (millionths of a henry) per foot.

 Any time conductors are surrounded by an insulator (dielectric), capacitance occurs. You want this to happen with capacitors inside the amplifier, but not in the cables. Depending on the insulator, some of the electrical signal passing through the cable is transferred to the insulator, stored as energy (electrons), then released back into the cable where it causes a degradation in the sound quality. The type of insulator has a direct effect on the capacitance. Various insulators are used in high fidelity cables, and, in increasing quality, they are PVC, followed by polyethylene, polypropylene, and finally, Teflon, which is the best. Usually, Teflon insulated cables are the most expensive, partially because it is a difficult material to work with. Typical values of capacitance with high quality audio cables vary from 6pF to 50pF per foot. Inductance is the property of the signal in one conductor inducing current in another nearby conductor, and inhibiting current flow in the opposite direction. This is desirable in transformers, but not in cables. Since cables usually have two leads, each conducting in the opposite direction to complete the circuit, high inductance can cause the flow of current in one lead to interfere with the flow in the other lead. Inductance values for audio cables vary from about 0.1 microhenrys to 0.6 microhenrys per foot.

 Some amplifiers are more sensitive than others to the load that the speaker cable places upon them. The higher the output impedance, the more likely capacitance and inductance of the cable will affect the sound quality. Tube amplifiers are probably most sensitive, since they tend to have higher output impedances (e.g., 1 Ohm) than solid state amplifiers (e.g., 0.01 Ohm). In any case, however, capacitance and inductance values are important in determining how the cables will perform in any sound system."


 Cables...
 inductance: 0,1 to 0,6PF = 600%
 capacitance from 6 to 50MH. = 833%

 Link:
http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_2_1/flatln.html


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Agnostic* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Ah so he tried that trick before as well huh? If you have evidence you provide it, or you make an exact reference. That's sound scientific method. If you don't want to provide evidence you say you have, or refuse to make an exact reference you are basically just proving your inability to take part in a serious discussion. 

 I'll stop asking you to show the money Tourmaline, it seems you're not just plain broke but actually completely bankrupt.



_

 

Don't make me laugh, *the one who cannot read an entire thread.* He's showing his real face here, being lazy and afraid of actually being proven wrong.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 So, who's not providing now huh? The only one not providing anything usefull is you, apart from being WAY OFF TOPIC! There are other cable threads to discuss that further this thread is about something else, strange how the sceptics always turn these threads in a cable discussion!

 If you refuse to read a thread, you're NOT interested!

 Thought you were in bed allready.


----------



## Agnostic

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_This is the *last time *i am doing the "dirty" work for the lazy sceptics, who cannot read an entire thread but just the first and last page and state there's nothing interesting in there!


 Speaker cables and interconnects represent one of the most controversial subjects in audio/video. Do they make a difference in the quality of the signal being passed from one component to another? Are they worth the price? You will find audiophiles of all degrees of experience and expertise answering these two questions with yes's and no's. Why the controversy? At least part of the answer lies in what we have been told, rather than what we have heard for ourselves. Secondly, it is difficult to define precisely what to listen for when comparing cables, and third, any particular cable may sound quite different with one set of equipment than with another.

 During the last year, we began researching some of these questions for ourselves, believing at the outset that cables probably did not make any truly noticeable improvement in sound quality. We were wrong in our assumption, and how!

 Cables do make a difference, and in order to see why, it is first necessary to understand the characteristics that affect their ability to transmit a signal.

 The "personality" of a cable is determined by three basic electrical properties: resistance, capacitance, and inductance. Resistance is probably the smallest factor, because cables use good conductors (copper and silver). The real culprits in cable transmission are capacitance, measured in picofarads or pF (trillionths of a farad) per foot, and inductance, measured in microhenrys (millionths of a henry) per foot.

 Any time conductors are surrounded by an insulator (dielectric), capacitance occurs. You want this to happen with capacitors inside the amplifier, but not in the cables. Depending on the insulator, some of the electrical signal passing through the cable is transferred to the insulator, stored as energy (electrons), then released back into the cable where it causes a degradation in the sound quality. The type of insulator has a direct effect on the capacitance. Various insulators are used in high fidelity cables, and, in increasing quality, they are PVC, followed by polyethylene, polypropylene, and finally, Teflon, which is the best. Usually, Teflon insulated cables are the most expensive, partially because it is a difficult material to work with. Typical values of capacitance with high quality audio cables vary from 6pF to 50pF per foot. Inductance is the property of the signal in one conductor inducing current in another nearby conductor, and inhibiting current flow in the opposite direction. This is desirable in transformers, but not in cables. Since cables usually have two leads, each conducting in the opposite direction to complete the circuit, high inductance can cause the flow of current in one lead to interfere with the flow in the other lead. Inductance values for audio cables vary from about 0.1 microhenrys to 0.6 microhenrys per foot.

 Some amplifiers are more sensitive than others to the load that the speaker cable places upon them. The higher the output impedance, the more likely capacitance and inductance of the cable will affect the sound quality. Tube amplifiers are probably most sensitive, since they tend to have higher output impedances (e.g., 1 Ohm) than solid state amplifiers (e.g., 0.01 Ohm). In any case, however, capacitance and inductance values are important in determining how the cables will perform in any sound system.


 Cables...
 inductance: 0,1 to 0,6PF = 600%
 capacitance from 6 to 50MH. = 833%

 This is an excerpt of a website, independant, who measured different brand cables._

 

Finally, some reason!

 Now the problem is that I never claimed that cables make no difference, I'm actually open to the idea that there are at least some qualities of interconnects that affect sound quality up to a certain point. None of my arguments however has been about interconnects. My objections were to _POWER CABLES_. This information is not about power cables and does not apply to power cables, because power cables are not in the signal path.

 Back to the drawing board! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



 Anyway, you _finally_ gave me your two cents so I guess you're not bankrupt after all.


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_BigShot actually provided the link, i pasted it into the thread but it wasn't something you liked, That's probably why you can't remember?!
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 It was the link about the figures of differences between cables, if i recall correctly! It is still in there. read it._

 

Wrong. I have a very specific recollection of the times that you have failed to provide support for your statements.

 The thread that you linked to previously in this thread is entitled Is copper warmer because of signal loss. In that thread, you made an assertion to the effect that some skeptics in some other locked thread claimed that they listen with measurements and not with their ears. You did not identify the prior thread that you were referring to, or the skeptics who made the alleged statement, and when I repeatedly asked you for a link to that prior statement, and you refused to provide one.

 The thread that you are referring to in the post that I quoted above is a different thread called Can you tell the difference between different cables. In that thread, you quoted from an article, but you then refused to provide a link to the article, or identify its author. Both BigShot and I found the link independently when you continued to refuse to do so. Even then, the best that you could say is "This could be it."

 Your pants are down. Again.


 Edit: My God, in the time it took me to type that last post, you have once again quoted the very same article that you quoted in the "Can you tell the difference" thread, and you have once again quoted it without attribution, reference or a link. To save others the frustration of asking you again to support your own statement, here is the link: http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_2_1/flatln.html


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Wrong. I have a very specific recollection of the times that you have failed to provide support for your statements.

 The thread that you linked to previously in this thread is entitled Is copper warmer because of signal loss. In that thread, you made an assertion to the effect that some skeptics in some other locked thread claimed that they listen with measurements and not with their ears. You did not identify the prior thread that you were referring to, or the skeptics who made the alleged statement, and when I repeatedly asked you for a link to that prior statement, and you refused to provide one.

 The thread that you are referring to in the post that I quoted above is a different thread called Can you tell the difference between different cables. In that thread, you quoted from an article, but you then refused to provide a link to the article, or identify its author. Both BigShot and I found the link independently when you continued to refuse to do so. Even then, the best that you could say is "This could be it."

 Your pants are down. Again.


 Edit: My God, in the time it took me to type that last post, you have once again quoted the very same article that you quoted in the "Can you tell the difference" thread, and you have once again quoted it without attribution, reference or a link. To save others the frustration of asking you again to support your own statement, here is the link: http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_2_1/flatln.html_

 

Ah, but you recall Black Stuart backing me up on this one and clearly stated that what i said was true and in that specific thread.

 You sceptics are just lazy and never provide any research. If any, i just read posts about "provide the link" from you febs.

 I allready provided the link.
 So, be carefull with your statements next time, 

 Your pants never where up, providing nothing substantial in any thread. 

 It's always the same people bursting in threads like these and turning it around. *THIS thread is not about cables!*


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Agnostic* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Finally, some reason!

 Now the problem is that I never claimed that cables make no difference, I'm actually open to the idea that there are at least some qualities of interconnects that affect sound quality up to a certain point. None of my arguments however has been about interconnects. My objections were to POWER CABLES. This information is not about power cables and does not apply to power cables, because power cables are not in the signal path.

 Back to the drawing board! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



 Anyway, you finally gave me your two cents so I guess you're not bankrupt after all. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

Really? Aren't you guys claiming all cables are the same?! Substitute the speakercable plugs or IC plugs for powercable plugs and we're done.


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_this would accomplish nothing. Any reasonably well made cable of a reasonable length with reasonable gauge that satisfies the application the cable is used for, has min effect on FR in the time domain and impulse response will result in essentially the same harmonic content. Assuming you are using the equipment that's commercially available.

 Now..then how do you measure the difference in cables? 
 is FFT the answer? 
 is FFT accurate enough? 
 If you don't use FFT, then what?
 Do you test the cable at all fundamental frequencies? (the lumped wire model is frequency dependent)
 Do you test the cable with a complex frequency?
 Do you test the cable with frequency that's changing over time?
*How do you measure a system (cable as a system) that's not linear and time invariant?* <- I think this is the hardest test, this actually only solves the problem of viewing cable as a filter; what about as circuit with the same non linear and time variant value for RLC? ...... I do not have the knowledge to analysis this nor know a way to test it; but maybe some one do!

 More questions than answers. No company will spend the money to R&D (building different cable and try to hear a difference is not R&D in my book), no intellectually component researcher will waste their time/money to solve these problem. The audio cable discussion shall forever be a back and forth bickering of believer and nonbeliever._

 

anyone wants to tackle the tests?


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Wrong. I have a very specific recollection of the times that you have failed to provide support for your statements.

 The thread that you linked to previously in this thread is entitled Is copper warmer because of signal loss. In that thread, you made an assertion to the effect that some skeptics in some other locked thread claimed that they listen with measurements and not with their ears. You did not identify the prior thread that you were referring to, or the skeptics who made the alleged statement, and when I repeatedly asked you for a link to that prior statement, and you refused to provide one.

 The thread that you are referring to in the post that I quoted above is a different thread called Can you tell the difference between different cables. In that thread, you quoted from an article, but you then refused to provide a link to the article, or identify its author. Both BigShot and I found the link independently when you continued to refuse to do so. Even then, the best that you could say is "This could be it."

 Your pants are down. Again.


 Edit: My God, in the time it took me to type that last post, you have once again quoted the very same article that you quoted in the "Can you tell the difference" thread, and you have once again quoted it without attribution, reference or a link. To save others the frustration of asking you again to support your own statement, here is the link: http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_2_1/flatln.html_

 

No you are wrong, since Black Stuart backed me up, you were gone in that specific thread and now you turn up here to moan about it again.

 Looks a bit very suspicous to me.......


----------



## meat01

Quote:


 Cables...
 inductance: 0,1 to 0,6PF = 600%
 capacitance from 6 to 50MH. = 833% 
 

Now can you prove these differences in measurements are actually audible?


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *meat01* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Now can you prove these differences in measurements are actually audible?_

 

can you they don't?!


----------



## meat01

Quote:


 can you they don't?! 
 

Yes


----------



## earwicker7

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Agnostic* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Finally, some reason!

 Now the problem is that I never claimed that cables make no difference, I'm actually open to the idea that there are at least some qualities of interconnects that affect sound quality up to a certain point. None of my arguments however has been about interconnects. My objections were to POWER CABLES. This information is not about power cables and does not apply to power cables, because power cables are not in the signal path.

 Back to the drawing board! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



 Anyway, you finally gave me your two cents so I guess you're not bankrupt after all. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

One thing I would keep in mind is that when people first began saying that interconnects made a difference, everyone said they were crazy. Now (this is an estimate, but I think it's accurate) 90% of audiophiles have accepted that interconnects make a difference but poopoo the idea that power cables do. IMO, in 10 years, it will be the same with power cables.

 I look at this holistically... from one end (the wall socket) to the other (the driver) you're dealing with an electrical signal. It's only in the last few centimeters that things fall into the mechanical realm. I don't think it's that far out to claim that the more stable, pure, or however you want to put it the electrical signal is, the more pure the sound will be.

 For what it's worth, I can with complete confidence say that, with the exception of switching from bargain basement cans to high end cans, the thing that has made the most difference in my system is the Nordost Thor power supply. More than adding a headphone amp, more than listening to analog vs digital, more than switching to tubes, etc. The rest were certainly improvements, even vast improvements. But they were NOTHING compared to the level of improvement that I received from upgrading to a quality power supply. None of the previous upgrades allowed me to hear freaking echoes and reverb which I can hear now. This may not sound like a big deal, but before that I was lucky if I could say "Yeah, they had the string section somewhere over here, the choral section somewhere over here, percussionist somewhere over here" etc. After adding the Thor, I can, through the spatial cues, differentiate exactly where the different singers in the chorus are, whether the tympani is slightly to the left of the triangle player, etc. IT'S THAT BIG OF A DIFFERENCE!!!


----------



## tourmaline

lawngnome:

 "Cable's make little difference".

 Are you getting converted? You're going from there's no difference to "little" difference.

 We must have some affect then.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *meat01* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Yes_

 

Show me; i allready provided a link they do.


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *earwicker7* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I can with complete confidence say that, with the exception of switching from bargain basement cans to high end cans, the thing that has made the most difference in my system is the Nordost Thor power supply._

 

If you mean this, that's a power conditioner, not a power supply. It supplies "conditioned" (cleaned up) AC power. Might be a good conditioner though, not saying the contrary, but this is not a power supply. At least not a regulated AC-DC power supply like the one we have largely talked about in this thread with the boiler analogy.

 A poorly built power supply, even fed with perfectly clean AC from an excellent power conditioner like that one, will create rippled/jagged and poor quality DC.


 For the record, I find the Note on that page particularly paradoxical, given that this is a power conditioner after all:

  Quote:


 NOTE: The Thor does not come with a power cord. Nordost believes that the Thor is capable of remarkable performance and as such deserves better than a $3 throw-in AC cord. Please call us for a recommendation or select from any of Nordost's excellent power cords. 
 

Why would you need a "high-end" power cord to carry "dirty" power from the wall to this unit? (Rhetorical question of course)


----------



## tourmaline

strangely enough, when i totally modded my amp, including the powersection, the amp sounded better without a filter then when i placed a filter in front of it!

 I lost detail, compared to the modded amp directly plugging into the socket!

 So, clearly a good performing powersection in your amp is more efficient then using an external filter or regenerating powerplant.

 The better the caps in your powersection, the cleaner the DC will be used throughout your amplifier!


----------



## tourmaline

febs, you're on my ignore list.

 Moaning about old threads, in wich clearly people backed me up about the things i said and clearly stated it was the truth, providing no input and dissapearing again in this thread, clearly shows me something about you.

 I quote Black Stuart

*"I remember well the thread that Tourmaline referred to in which some android said that he bought his cables according to the information supplied by a measuring instrument, because he 'did'nt trust his ears'. He disappeared from that thread when I asked him who listened to the music 'his ears or the measuring instrument'."*

 And again, febs is gone.........


----------



## wower

This is a hot topic. Why are you making his case? This problem has an easy solution; I put him on my ignore list and head-fi has been a better place since then. His fans can read him in peace. Everyone is happy. Has he been banned again?


----------



## earwicker7

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_If you mean this, that's a power conditioner, not a power supply. It supplies "conditioned" (cleaned up) AC power. Might be a good conditioner though, not saying the contrary, but this is not a power supply. At least not a regulated AC-DC power supply like the one we have largely talked about in this thread with the boiler analogy.

 A poorly built power supply, even fed with perfectly clean AC from an excellent power conditioner like that one, will create rippled/jagged and poor quality DC.


 For the record, I find the Note on that page particularly paradoxical, given that this is a power conditioner after all:



 Why would you need a "high-end" power cord to carry "dirty" power from the wall to this unit? (Rhetorical question of course)_

 

Oops... sorry about the semantic glitch there. Technically Nordost claims it is not a power conditioner but a "Mains Supply".
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 As to why you would need a cord--again, I'll fall back on the idea that it's all holistic. You're only as good as your weakest link. I don't think the Thor, or any unit for that matter, can completely block A/C born noise. Maybe it only lets 1% through, but that 1% sounds a whole lot worse with a cord that is of low quality.

 To me, it's all about low level details. If you're only listening to close mic'd music like rock or rap, you're not hearing all your system is capable of and may not need this level of detail. Don't get me wrong, I probably listen to more rock than classical, but classical shows me what my system is capable of and it is here where I notice the difference that a good power setup makes. It's there in rock, but it's much, much more subtle. It is day and night with classical. Again, this has to do with rock generally being close mic'd, so there are few if any spatial cues in rock. If you aren't noticing any difference in cables, I can't say this enough... don't use rock music for your comparisons!


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *wower* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_This is a hot topic. Why are you making his case? This problem has an easy solution; I put him on my ignore list and head-fi has been a better place since then. His fans can read him in peace. Everyone is happy. Has he been banned again?_

 


 No but some other people are very close to it.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *wower* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_This is a hot topic. Why are you making his case? This problem has an easy solution; I put him on my ignore list and head-fi has been a better place since then. His fans can read him in peace. Everyone is happy. Has he been banned again?_

 

The things is, that people are calling him names and stuff, yet still burst into his threads. If you don't like the things he is writing about, then just *stay out of the threads!!!*


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *earwicker7* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Oops... sorry about the semantic glitch there. Technically Nordost claims it is not a power conditioner but a "Mains Supply".
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 As to why you would need a cord--again, I'll fall back on the idea that it's all holistic. You're only as good as your weakest link. I don't think the Thor, or any unit for that matter, can completely block A/C born noise. Maybe it only lets 1% through, but that 1% sounds a whole lot worse with a cord that is of low quality.

 To me, it's all about low level details. If you're only listening to close mic'd music like rock or rap, you're not hearing all your system is capable of and may not need this level of detail. Don't get me wrong, I probably listen to more rock than classical, but classical shows me what my system is capable of and it is here where I notice the difference that a good power setup makes. It's there in rock, but it's much, much more subtle. It is day and night with classical. Again, this has to do with rock generally being close mic'd, so there are few if any spatial cues in rock. If you aren't noticing any difference in cables, I can't say this enough... don't use rock music for your comparisons!_

 

In general, these regenerating powerplants are more or less the same as a powersection of a (power) amp.

 Transformer, smoothing caps/filtering caps and filtering high frequency noise.


----------



## rsaavedra

I myself have a good power conditioner, the PS Audio Ultimate Outlet. It's protecting and cleaning power for my plasma and my subwoofer. And it is plugged to the wall with an excellent quality power cord: the one I got here on head-fi through a group-buy: the $13 Quail power cord. Excellent buy! The power cord that the Ultimate Outlet came with itself is no slouch by any means however.

 Another Quail power cord (got two) is bringing power to the power supplies of my Dynahi.

 Here it is from one of the pics I took when finishing my dynahi enclosures. The Quail power cord shown on the bottom right:


----------



## earwicker7

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_In general, these regenerating powerplants are more or less the same as a powersection of an amp._

 

Nope... this isn't a regenerator. I've had a regenerator, the PS Audio P500. It was nice, really nice actually, but it's not even close to being in the same league as the Thor.

 Check out my thread about it, it has a picture of the insides. It looks nothing like my amps power supply.

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=261826


----------



## wower

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_ *stay out of the threads!!!*_

 

x2

 The solution is so easy...


----------



## fwojciec

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_febs, you're on my ignore list.

 Moaning about old threads, in wich clearly people backed me up about the things i said and clearly stated it was the truth, providing no input and dissapearing again in this thread, clearly shows me something about you._

 

Well, if the people back in those threads clearly backed you up and in addition clearly stated that what you say is "the truth," then it must be the case, I guess :/ I am a skeptic no more 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 On a more serious note: 

 It seems like you are now on a mission to simply sabotage this thread. I mean, if you need to post twice in response to a single post it means that maybe you're going a little too fast, for example!


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *earwicker7* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Nope... this isn't a regenerator. I've had a regenerator, the PS Audio P500. It was nice, really nice actually, but it's not even close to being in the same league as the Thor.

 Check out my thread about it, it has a picture of the insides. It looks nothing like my amps power supply.

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=261826_

 

well, actually it is...

 i see the transformers, the caps.....and the powersockets are fed by the transformer in the middle!


----------



## vcoheda

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *earwicker7* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_For what it's worth, I can with complete confidence say that, with the exception of switching from bargain basement cans to high end cans, the thing that has made the most difference in my system is the Nordost Thor power supply. More than adding a headphone amp, more than listening to analog vs digital, more than switching to tubes, etc. The rest were certainly improvements, even vast improvements. But they were NOTHING compared to the level of improvement that I received from upgrading to a quality power supply. None of the previous upgrades allowed me to hear freaking echoes and reverb which I can hear now. This may not sound like a big deal, but before that I was lucky if I could say "Yeah, they had the string section somewhere over here, the choral section somewhere over here, percussionist somewhere over here" etc. After adding the Thor, I can, through the spatial cues, differentiate exactly where the different singers in the chorus are, whether the tympani is slightly to the left of the triangle player, etc. IT'S THAT BIG OF A DIFFERENCE!!!_

 

why do you write things like this. now i'm going to have take out all my savings to buy one of these.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *fwojciec* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Well, if the people back in those threads clearly backed you up and in addition clearly stated that what you say is "the truth," then it must be the case, I guess :/ I am a skeptic no more 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 On a more serious note: 

 It seems like you are now on a mission to simply sabotage this thread. I mean, if you need to post twice in response to a single post it means that maybe you're going a little too fast, for example!_

 

it seems febs was on a mission and failed, as you also should notice, he's gone again!


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *vcoheda* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_why do you write things like this. now i'm going to have take out all my savings to buy one of these. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 


 Before you do, mod your powersection completely with better caps like black gates or silmics. They do more then filters before the amp. The amp is nonetheless converting AC to DC into your amp. your powersection IS filtering the AC to clean dc, The better the caps, the cleaner the dc to work with for your amp. That's why battery powered amps sound so good, clean juice, like better ac powersections.


----------



## earwicker7

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_well, actually it is...

 i see the transformers, the caps.....and the powersockets are fed by the transformer in the middle!_

 

Ah, you need to see the insides of my B-52 power supply. It looks WAY different
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 So where are the transformers in that pic? I'm no electrical engineer, but aren't they supposed to be really big and round? I know they are in the PS Audio, I had to take it apart to change a chip.


----------



## Wmcmanus

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Patrick82* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Isn't it better to spend the time listening to music than read/write posts in this thread? It's like you are car racing and you argue about which gas to use, and then the race is over before you made your decision._

 

Like cables, the gas you use in race cars makes a difference! 

 But then there are those who frequent racing sites who argue (no, insist) that despite the empirical evidence suggesting otherwise, the type of gas used makes no difference. This, despite evidence provided by test laps using the same car, same driver, same tire temps, same road conditions, and everything else that you can reasonably control for, but using different gas. They claim that the observed differences between trials (which in cold reality was caused by nothing but the gas itself) was somehow "caused" by something else. What else could it be? It's not their job to tell us that, only that it must be something else (placebo?) because it couldn't possibly be the gas itself. Oh sure, there will always be a little noise introduced into any scientic experiment, no matter how well controlled the experiment might be, so the naysayers will always point to this and ignore the big picture. Even in the face of clear evidence that refutes their theory, they still persist with their "show me" pratter. So it does no good to show them because when you do, over and over again, they find fault with your methodology.

 The reality is, none of this makes a difference in promoting world peace, so if you want to believe your little Rat Shack cables are as good as anything else available it the market today then listen away with them and smugly laugh at all of the "fools" who have fallen for the marketing hype (or who have heard for themselves and quite reasonably believe that what they are hearing is worth the difference in cost). If, on the other hand, you like your fancy and expensive cables that make a difference to your ears, then smugly laugh at the "idiots" who have purposefully chosen not to crawl out from under their rocks to give it a listen for themselves (or who have but have convinced themselves that their theory must be right so they refuse to allow their ears to tell them what they're really hearing).

 But either way, let people believe what they want to believe. You'll never convince them otherwise, no matter how carefully crafted your argument is on either side of this hopeless fence.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *earwicker7* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Ah, you need to see the insides of my B-52 power supply. It looks WAY different
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 So where are the transformers in that pic? I'm no electrical engineer, but aren't they supposed to be really big and round? I know they are in the PS Audio, I had to take it apart to change a chip._

 

I know what a good powersection of an amp looks like, lots of good caps in there for powerreserve and smoothing caps, for clean power!

 The transformer is actually the thing in the middle, and the cap is right next to it. You see those copper traces going to the sockets?, the one in the center actually starts at the transformer. The way i see it, at the right it's the smoothing part of the transformer, at the left probably the high frequency filter and the electronics left in front are for manipulating the waveform? The reddish round thing next to the black square converter is also a transformer or a spool.

 So actually this thing is filtering the AC and cleans it and then provides it to the sockets on the back of the thor.

 Actually, dirty AC in, clean(er) AC out.

 Also the valhalla cable used has big influence on how this powerplant sounds, the valhalla is one of the best cables around.


----------



## earwicker7

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I know what a good powersection of an amp looks like, lots of good caps in there for powerreserve and smoothing caps, for clean power!

 The transformer is actually the thing in the middle, and the cap is right next to it._

 

Gotcha. Wow, it looks different.

 I'm curious... how can they look completely different yet do the same thing? Again, I'm not an engineer, so pardon my ignorance


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Like cables, the gas you use in race cars makes a difference! 

 But then there are those who frequent racing sites who argue (no, insist) that despite the empirical evidence suggesting otherwise, the type of gas used makes no difference. This, despite evidence provided by test laps using the same car, same driver, same tire temps, same road conditions, and everything else that you can reasonably control for, but using different gas. They claim that the observed differences between trials (which in cold reality was caused by nothing but the gas itself) was somehow "caused" by something else. What else could it be? It's not their job to tell us that, only that it must be something else (placebo?) because it couldn't possibly be the gas itself. Oh sure, there will always be a little noise introduced into any scientic experiment, no matter how well controlled the experiment might be, so the naysayers will always point to this and ignore the big picture. Even in the face of clear evidence that refutes their theory, they still persist with their "show me" pratter. So it does no good to show them because when you do, over and over again, they find fault with your methodology._

 

Wayne it is true that this arguments maybe have been proved in the case of the car racing sites, but till now, I have not visited any single audio site, that have provided any evidence, not even empirical, on why the cables sound different, and how to measure those differences, or why this hi-end cable is better than this other, or why it even make a difference...of course other than the classic claims of what they hear, that nobody can refute as nobody is using their ears...and that is why these kind of controversies exist...

 And IIRC here is all the opposite, the believers always find flaws in the few tests that the skeptics have implemented to disprove them, and IIRC they have *never* proposed any better or worst test, to evne try to prove or disprove anything...


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Like cables, the gas you use in race cars makes a difference! 

 But then there are those who frequent racing sites who argue (no, insist) that despite the empirical evidence suggesting otherwise, the type of gas used makes no difference. This, despite evidence provided by test laps using the same car, same driver, same tire temps, same road conditions, and everything else that you can reasonably control for, but using different gas. They claim that the observed differences between trials (which in cold reality was caused by nothing but the gas itself) was somehow "caused" by something else. What else could it be? It's not their job to tell us that, only that it must be something else (placebo?) because it couldn't possibly be the gas itself. Oh sure, there will always be a little noise introduced into any scientic experiment, no matter how well controlled the experiment might be, so the naysayers will always point to this and ignore the big picture. Even in the face of clear evidence that refutes their theory, they still persist with their "show me" pratter. So it does no good to show them because when you do, over and over again, they find fault with your methodology.

 The reality is, none of this makes a difference in promoting world peace, so if you want to believe your little Rat Shack cables are as good as anything else available it the market today then listen away with them and smugly laugh at all of the "fools" who have fallen for the marketing hype (or who have heard for themselves and quite reasonably believe that what they are hearing is worth the difference in cost). If, on the other hand, you like your fancy and expensive cables that make a difference to your ears, then smugly laugh at the "idiots" who have purposefully chosen not to crawl out from under their rocks to give it a listen for themselves (or who have but have convinced themselves that their theory must be right so they refuse to allow their ears to tell them what they're really hearing).

 But either way, let people believe what they want to believe. You'll never convince them otherwise, no matter how carefully crafted your argument is on either side of this hopeless fence._

 

Problem is, the scientists don't agree, recording engeneers don't agree, so how could we on headfi agree. For links provided against differences in cables, there can be as much links provided in favour of cables.

 Just use what you think is appropriate.


----------



## vcoheda

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Just use what you think is appropriate._

 

would be a good way to end this thread.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *earwicker7* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Gotcha. Wow, it looks different.

 I'm curious... how can they look completely different yet do the same thing? Again, I'm not an engineer, so pardon my ignorance 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

They do the same thing... looks can be perceptive...... the only difference is:
 powersection of an amp.....AC to DC conversion and cleaning up and the thor AC to AC coversion and cleaning up. The principle is really not that much different. A powersection of an amp has more caps in there, that is the powerreserve, they act more or less like a huge battery, providing power when needed. These are not in the thor, since he doesn't need it.

 Did you even understand the things i said about the parts used?! If you would, you would know what they actually do in the powerplant. They just filter the dirty AC, clean it up and transport it to the sockets on the back of the thor. There IS nothing more to it!

 It IS nothing magical.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 If any, looking at the components used, i wonder why it is soo expensive, save from the cost of the valhalla cable. there's nothing extroadinary stuff in there, as said, save for the valhalla cable wich is one of the leaders in it's class.

 If any, i would say that transformer is really small for power amps. I would be very surprised if it sounded good with very heavy poweramps. That little transformer can no way deliver enough juice as a socket can do for powerhungry poweramps, wich can draw 3000 watts each!

 A 500 watts class a transistor power amp can easally draw 3000 watts.

 This in general is a big complaint about powerplants not being able to provide enough juice fast enough for quick transients! hence, they limit a poweramp.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *vcoheda* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_would be a good way to end this thread._

 

Agree, it served it's purpose and everybody is posting OFF TOPIC!


----------



## LawnGnome

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_lawngnome:

 "Cable's make little difference".

 Are you getting converted? You're going from there's no difference to "little" difference.

 We must have some affect then._

 

No, cable's do have different electrical properties. And yes this would affect the flow of electricity.

 However, in reality, the differences between decent quality cables (not crappy soldered stuff) is so small that the differences are inaudible. 

 To think a few picofarads at a max of 20khz will effect the electrical response is absurd. At several gigahertz, then yes, it will most likely have an effect. But that number is many multiples higher than the frequencies we are working with.

 Cable tests done within this own community show people can't tell the difference between silver, copper, and ratshack cables. He sent unmarked cables around, and got people to try to correctly guess the right cable.

 Statistically, since there was 3 cables, one in 27 random choices would be correct. Only one person correctly identified the cables, out of everyone who was in the test.

 Other testing done has revealed the same results.

 People must realize our ears really aren't very good. Compared to many other animals, our hearing is extremely poor. Also, since there is a psychological aspect to hearing, it makes our sense of hearing even more unreliable. Our mind and senses are far too easily tricked to be considered accurate instruments. 

 Many things can change a person's hearing, time of day, mood, blood pressure, humidity.

 Instruments are far better than our ears for measuring. We can hear only up to 20khz for the most part. Some people can hear up to 30khz. Instruments can measure several gigahertz. 

 Audio does not involve any special physics or electrical principles that we can not measure. It is VERY basic compared to other electrical systems. Audio is purely physics. When you start applying all of these magic properties to it, it is no longer audio, it becomes a head game.


----------



## LawnGnome

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Like cables, the gas you use in race cars makes a difference! 

 But then there are those who frequent racing sites who argue (no, insist) that despite the empirical evidence suggesting otherwise, the type of gas used makes no difference. This, despite evidence provided by test laps using the same car, same driver, same tire temps, same road conditions, and everything else that you can reasonably control for, but using different gas. They claim that the observed differences between trials (which in cold reality was caused by nothing but the gas itself) was somehow "caused" by something else. What else could it be? It's not their job to tell us that, only that it must be something else (placebo?) because it couldn't possibly be the gas itself. Oh sure, there will always be a little noise introduced into any scientic experiment, no matter how well controlled the experiment might be, so the naysayers will always point to this and ignore the big picture. Even in the face of clear evidence that refutes their theory, they still persist with their "show me" pratter. So it does no good to show them because when you do, over and over again, they find fault with your methodology.

 The reality is, none of this makes a difference in promoting world peace, so if you want to believe your little Rat Shack cables are as good as anything else available it the market today then listen away with them and smugly laugh at all of the "fools" who have fallen for the marketing hype (or who have heard for themselves and quite reasonably believe that what they are hearing is worth the difference in cost). If, on the other hand, you like your fancy and expensive cables that make a difference to your ears, then smugly laugh at the "idiots" who have purposefully chosen not to crawl out from under their rocks to give it a listen for themselves (or who have but have convinced themselves that their theory must be right so they refuse to allow their ears to tell them what they're really hearing).

 But either way, let people believe what they want to believe. You'll never convince them otherwise, no matter how carefully crafted your argument is on either side of this hopeless fence._

 

Except NOBODY has provided anything.

 They have showed cables have a few picofarads difference. (1pF= 0.000001uF)

 Nothing shows any difference in frequency response, not even a simple O-scope reading. O-scopes can measure much more accurately, so if there is any change, it will pick it up. But nada!

 So, no. Nobody has shown they make an audible difference.

 Feel free to try again though.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *LawnGnome* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_No, cable's do have different electrical properties. And yes this would affect the flow of electricity.

 However, in reality, the differences between decent quality cables (not crappy soldered stuff) is so small that the differences are inaudible. 

 To think a few picofarads at a max of 20khz will effect the electrical response is absurd. At several gigahertz, then yes, it will most likely have an effect. But that number is many multiples higher than the frequencies we are working with.

 Cable tests done within this own community show people can't tell the difference between silver, copper, and ratshack cables. He sent unmarked cables around, and got people to try to correctly guess the right cable.

 Statistically, since there was 3 cables, one in 27 random choices would be correct. Only one person correctly identified the cables, out of everyone who was in the test.

 Other testing done has revealed the same results.

 People must realize our ears really aren't very good. Compared to many other animals, our hearing is extremely poor. Also, since there is a psychological aspect to hearing, it makes our sense of hearing even more unreliable. Our mind and senses are far too easily tricked to be considered accurate instruments. 

 Many things can change a person's hearing, time of day, mood, blood pressure, humidity.

 Instruments are far better than our ears for measuring. We can hear only up to 20khz for the most part. Some people can hear up to 30khz. Instruments can measure several gigahertz. 

 Audio does not involve any special physics or electrical principles that we can not measure. It is VERY basic compared to other electrical systems. Audio is purely physics. When you start applying all of these magic properties to it, it is no longer audio, it becomes a head game._

 

I read the thread about the test and at least one got all three right. He was also the one with the best rig, so more revealing and he stated he could clearly hear the differences between the cables.

 So, as said before, is it possible on a very high end rig to determin wich cable is wich, i would say probably.

 As said before, instruments cannot detect the influence of the insulator on the sound. It is more recognized as one of the things influencing the sound of a cable, apart from inductance and capacitance.

 yes, there are things that influence our hearing, but if the difference heard is consistant, then it is not an imagination. Now, if it was NOT consistant, then i would have to agree with you. if a cable sounds better any time, even when your sick or very tired, then that cable must sound better.


----------



## Wmcmanus

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Problem is, the scientists don't agree, recording engeneers don't agree, so how could we on headfi agree. For links provided against differences in cables, there can be as much links provided in favour of cables.

 Just use what you think is appropriate._

 

This, along with what Sovkiller has said above, is exactly what I was trying to get at. It's kind of like the expression "Figures lie and liars figure" in the sense that when what people are really bent on is argumentation for the mere sake of argumentation, they'll simply choose whatever "evidence" that they wish to so long as it supports their side of the argument. 

 Why is this? Because they're more interested in arguing than in taking in all sides, looking at the situation from all angles, and then drawing their own conclusions. They quickly become too emotionally involved with the "side" that they're on to even be able to see the other side. 

 Same thing happens when discussions turn to politics or religion. In a rhetorical sense only (please don't attempt to answer these questions), should abortion be legal? Should capital punishment be legal? Did Jesus exist and walk the face of this Earth? Does he still exist? If so, where and how? Only in the Church that you go to because the preacher says "Jesus is in the house today!" and everyone agrees with him, so you should as well? Or does he exist in all persons, places and things? Or not at all? And what about in the woman who had an abortion? Does he exist in her even if you don't think abortion itself should be legal? 

 The point isn't in these questions themselves or in the answers that you might propose to them. The point is that such questions are circular and feed back upon themselves, thus making whatever answers you might choose for one set of questions harder to support when considering your answers to other similar such quesitons. The "answers" that you propose as being the "correct" ones do nothing but beg more questions. 

 In reality, there are no real answers that everyone can agree on uniformally, and that's what makes the questions themselves interesting. It's only when you step back and realize that these types of questions don't need to answered *by you* for anyone else *but* you that can breathe clamly again and gently acknowledge that you don't* know* all of the answers, and that you only have your *opinions*, to which everyone is entitled to have (just like you), even those who don't agree with you. Same goes for the great cable debate.

 But it's no fun for people who love nothing more than to disagree and to "fight to be right" to simply agree to disagree. Even if it's an agreement to disagree, that's still an agreement, and that's the one thing they're not interested in doing. So posts like this quickly get ignored after perhaps one or two replies and then the thread carries on with page after page of further disagreements since that's where the real fun is for those who enjoy this sort of thing!


----------



## Zorander

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I read the thread about the test and at least one got all three right. He was also the one with the best rig, so more revealing and he stated he could clearly hear the differences between the cables._

 

I read that thread a while back so some things might have changed (been disclosed) since I first read it. But I remember the OP holding back the name (or user name) of that person and if so, there is no way to locate and hence identify the rig that person is using. So who is that sharp-eared winner?


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *LawnGnome* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Except NOBODY has provided anything.

 They have showed cables have a few picofarads difference. (1pF= 0.000001uF)

 Nothing shows any difference in frequency response, not even a simple O-scope reading. O-scopes can measure much more accurately, so if there is any change, it will pick it up. But nada!

 So, no. Nobody has shown they make an audible difference.

 Feel free to try again though._

 

Well, i did. They measured the cables in a line of a brand. I heard the cheaper and high end cables too and as the figures tell us, the higher end cables have less capacitance and inductance and sound better!

 So, apperently the figures show to me what i heard.

 Still no prove to you probably, but it is in line of what my ears actually told me. Could be you're underestimating the ears and brain.


----------



## LawnGnome

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I read the thread about the test and at least one got all three right. He was also the one with the best rig, so more revealing and he stated he could clearly hear the differences between the cables.

 So, as said before, is it possible on a very high end rig to determin wich cable is wich, i would say probably.

 As said before, instruments cannot detect the influence of the insulator on the sound. It is more recognized as one of the things influencing the sound of a cable, apart from inductance and capacitance.

 yes, there are things that influence our hearing, but if the difference heard is consistant, then it is not an imagination. Now, if it was NOT consistant, then i would have to agree with you. if a cable sounds better any time, even when your sick or very tired, then that cable must sound better._

 

The effect of the cable insulator CAN be measured.

 How do you think the insulators get their specifications and safety ratings? They are measured for several different electrical properties.

 The insulator is what for the large part gives the cable its capacitance, and like it has been shown in this thread, you can measure the difference in capacitance between cables. (even though a few pF)

 So yes, you can measure the effect of the cable insulation.

 You must realize, when you measure a cable, you are measuring everything with it. 

 The connectors, the solder joints, the wire metal, the insulation, the shielding.


*EDIT:*
http://sound.westhost.com/cables.htm
http://www.audioholics.com/education...able-resonance
http://www.audioholics.com/education...-you-snake-oil
http://www.audioholics.com/education...ables-debunked


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Zorander* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I read that thread a while back so some things might have changed (been disclosed) since I first read it. But I remember the OP holding back the name (or user name) of that person and if so, there is no way to locate and hence identify the rig that person is using. So who is that sharp-eared winner?_

 

Beats me, dunno his name. An "insider" said it was the one with the highest end rig and he guessed all three right.

 Maybe they are protecting his name and identity of being attacked on head-fi. Looking at all the cable threads, it is actually a good idea.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *LawnGnome* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The effect of the cable insulator CAN be measured.

 How do you think the insulators get their specifications and safety ratings? They are measured for several different electrical properties.

 The insulator is what for the large part gives the cable its capacitance, and like it has been shown in this thread, you can measure the difference in capacitance between cables. (even though a few pF)

 So yes, you can measure the effect of the cable insulation.

 You must realize, when you measure a cable, you are measuring everything with it. 

 The connectors, the solder joints, the wire metal, the insulation, the shielding._

 

Exactly. The problem is, how can you disect the cable and purely measure the difference in core(silver, silver plated copper or copper).

 professor ohno did apperently and has the patent on the ofocc copper single crystal structure wich according to his scientific measurements has significant better frequency response as a more poluted core. This is also true for silver cores, the single crystal structure IS cleaner.

 The only thing you can do is to hardwire the IC's or cables to the joints.

 I know teflon is 2.4 or 2.8 or something, by far the best insulator after a vacuum and air. Air is 1, so teflon is very good.

 But, since you are listening to the entire cable, the ones talking about a difference in cables include all these variables. Wich variable actually IS responsable for the biggest difference in sound, might well remain a mistery.

 A few PF might actually be quite much for a 2 volts signal. Most cdplayers have a signal output of 2-4,5 volts max. So, cdplayers vary in output between minimum of 2 volts to max. 4.5 volts. 4.5 volts are mainly older cdplayers. Most modern are 2 volts output. 2 volts ain't much, if you take all the influences into account.


----------



## Zorander

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Beats me, dunno his name. An "insider" said it was the one with the highest end rig and he guessed all three right.

 Maybe they are protecting his name and identity of being attacked on head-fi. Looking at all the cable threads, it is actually a good idea._

 

So how can we be sure of the credibility of this "insider" (and hence your prior statement)?


----------



## LawnGnome

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Exactly. The problem is, how can you disect the cable and purely measure the difference in core(silver, silver plated copper or copper).

 professor ohno did apperently and has the patent on the ofocc copper single crystal structure wich according to his scientific measurements has significant better frequency response as a more poluted core. This is also true for silver cores, the single crystal structure IS cleaner.

 The only thing you can do is to hardwire the IC's or cables to the joints.

 I know teflon is 2.4 or 2.8 or something, by far the best insulator after a vacuum and air. Air is 1, so teflon is very good.

 But, since you are listening to the entire cable, the ones talking about a difference in cables include all these variables. Wich variable actually IS responsable for the biggest difference in sound, might well remain a mistery.

 A few PF might actually be quite much for a 2 volts signal. Most cdplayers have a signal output of 2-4,5 volts max. So, cdplayers vary in output between minimum of 2 volts to max. 4.5 volts. 4.5 volts are mainly older cdplayers. Most modern are 2 volts output. 2 volts ain't much, if you take all the influences into account._

 

A few pF is nothing at the frequency of audio.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Zorander* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_So how can we be sure of the credibility of this "insider" (and hence your prior statement)? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

By reading that entire thread?
 The OP "knows" , send him a PM. Maybe he's willing to enlighten you?!

 That's the only way, since he's the only one with all the insights.

 I have to tell you what "other" people told me.


----------



## tourmaline

Always strange that threads like these always turn into cable threads. It is still way off topic.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *LawnGnome* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_A few pF is nothing at the frequency of audio._

 

Those few pf you're talking about might just be the difference people claim about extended highs and lows in higher end cables.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Do you exactly know which frequencies are actually effected?! You don't. You say it is out of the audio band/spectrum, i am not so sure about that.

 As said before, ohno proved that a single crystal structure has better frequency responce in the audible spectrum,20hz-20khz. And it is this single crystal structure used in the higher end cables, mostly, siince production of these cores are more expensive.


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_febs, you're on my ignore list._

 

So, I'm on your ignore list, and you've still chosen to reply three separate times to my single post? You're not doing a very good job of ignoring.

  Quote:


 Moaning about old threads 
 

You do recall that you were the one who referred to old threads, right?


----------



## LawnGnome

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Those few pf you're talking about might just be the difference people claim about extended highs and lows in higher end cables.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Do you exactly know which frequencies are actually effected?! You don't. You say it is out of the audio band/spectrum, i am not so sure about that.

 As said before, ohno proved that a single crystal structure has better frequency responce in the audible spectrum,20hz-20khz. And it is this single crystal structure used in the higher end cables, mostly, siince production of these cores are more expensive._

 

Read those links. They start to have effects in the Mhz range.


----------



## WindowsX

Ah.....I give up. It's just like saying "ghosts exists" to someone who doesn't believe in ghosts and never has seen it before.


----------



## archosman

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Vul Kuolun* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_...
 This guy is ruining himself, and it's a shame this forum functions as a platform for his obviously sickly self-portrayal and guys like you encourage him. This is irresponsible..._

 


 agreed...


----------



## Zorander

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Ah.....I give up. It's just like saying "ghosts exists" to someone who doesn't believe in ghosts and never has seen it before._

 

You're not cut out for the task anyway.


----------



## Wmcmanus

Quote:


 Quote:
 Originally Posted by Vul Kuolun 
 ...
 This guy is ruining himself, and it's a shame this forum functions as a platform for his obviously sickly self-portrayal and guys like you encourage him. This is irresponsible... 
 

 Quote:


  Originally Posted by *archosman* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_agreed...
	

	
	
		
		

		
			



_

 

While I can understand this sentiment, for the most part, Patrick posts in a responsible and civil manner and tends not to be argumentative. As is the case with any other member here, when and if he were to step over the line in violation of Head-Fi's rules and terms of use, we would then deal with the situation accordingly. Other than that there isn't a lot that we can, or should, do about the matter. It's a free world and (within reason) people should be allowed to express themselves as they wish.


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_this would accomplish nothing. Any reasonably well made cable of a reasonable length with reasonable gauge that satisfies the application the cable is used for, has min effect on FR in the time domain and impulse response will result in essentially the same harmonic content. Assuming you are using the equipment that's commercially available.

 Now..then how do you measure the difference in cables? 
 is FFT the answer? 
 is FFT accurate enough? 
 If you don't use FFT, then what?
 Do you test the cable at all fundamental frequencies? (the lumped wire model is frequency dependent)
 Do you test the cable with a complex frequency?
 Do you test the cable with frequency that's changing over time?
*How do you measure a system (cable as a system) that's not linear and time invariant?* <- I think this is the hardest test, this actually only solves the problem of viewing cable as a filter; what about as circuit with the same non linear and time variant value for RLC? ...... I do not have the knowledge to analysis this nor know a way to test it; but maybe some one do!

 More questions than answers. No company will spend the money to R&D (building different cable and try to hear a difference is not R&D in my book), no intellectually component researcher will waste their time/money to solve these problem. The audio cable discussion shall forever be a back and forth bickering of believer and nonbeliever._

 

finally I can bump this one without any concern of getting buried 3 pages back within 5 min


----------



## archosman

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_While I can understand this sentiment, for the most part, Patrick posts in a responsible and civil manner and tends not to be argumentative. As is the case with any other member here, when and if he were to step over the line in violation of Head-Fi's rules and terms of use, we would then deal with the situation accordingly. Other than that there isn't a lot that we can, or should, do about the matter. It's a free world and (within reason) people should be allowed to express themselves as they wish._

 


 Agreed too. It's just that based on observation some individuals can't take the "tweaks" seriously.


----------



## Agnostic

I still haven't seen any answer so I'll just re-post the statement of the situation.

  Quote:


 The proposition: Power cables affect sound quality:
 1. Nobody has offered any rational let alone scientifically plausible theory how this could work.
 2. All claims are based on what people say they hear. This does not prove anything as there is no need whatsoever for an objective change for a subjective change in experience to occur.
 3. The only meanigful test that exists: ABX'ing somehow magically doesn't work when it comes to cables. All ABX tests show that people hear no difference.
 4. The discussion ends up in cable "believers" attacking people that sum up the above arguments and arguing about the validity of all the evidence which speaks against the cable voodoo claims. Meanwhile there is still no explanation how there could even BE a difference let alone any proof that there IS a difference. 
 5 Hence, unless anyone offers proof or at the very, VERY least a viable, scientifically reasonable theory of HOW this magical change in sound quality occurs, this whole discussion is pointless because basically there is NOTHING TO DISCUSS. (even a good theory would not be methodologically sufficient because we have a better theory that's supported by evidence: placebo) 
 


 Read my lips: _[size=medium]show...me...the...money...[/size]_


----------



## infinitesymphony

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_How do you measure a system (cable as a system) that's not linear and time invariant?_

 

What exactly do you mean by "time invariant?" Do you mean "constantly changing over time" or "remains constant over time?"

 Just curious... If you're asking the former, in what ways do cables constantly change over time?

 If you're asking the latter, then it's no different from measuring any theoretically nonlinear system--for example, visiting the audiologist for a hearing test.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Agnostic* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The proposition: Power cables affect sound quality:
 1. Nobody has offered any rational let alone scientifically plausible theory how this could work._

 

Here's an example: Power cables with inadequate shielding allow external noise (RFI, EMI) into a device. Once the power enters the device, the filters in the power supply don't work well enough to compensate for the level of noise present. Thus, audio quality is affected.

 In an ideal world, every piece of gear would clean up the incoming power so that it was perfect. But, that's not so easy to implement, which is why many people add power conditioners and regenerators to a system. This is a personal anecdote, but I've heard sound quality differences that depended only upon how a component was plugged in (ex. surge strip, power conditioner, the wall). In my experience, the best sound came straight from the wall outlets. Then again, I'm living in a house where there aren't any high-powered devices on the same circuit as my audio equipment. People living in places like inner-city apartment complexes may find that the sound is significantly better through a conditioner.

 In other words, the quality of incoming power affects sound quality, and the cable is but one step in that chain. I don't necessarily advocate going nuts with the budget for a power cable; like interconnects, there's a point where the improvements are small enough not to be worthwhile (and that point may end with stock power cables). My point is that a power cable should at least be capable of transferring the power with minimal degradation.


----------



## wower

Quote:


 5 Hence, unless anyone offers proof or at the very, VERY least a viable, scientifically reasonable theory of HOW this magical change in sound quality occurs, this whole discussion is pointless because basically there is NOTHING TO DISCUSS. (even a good theory would not be methodologically sufficient because we have a better theory that's supported by evidence: placebo) 
 

This boarders on nihilism, but that's not my point: at some point Pat crossed a line. I do think cables made a difference but his tweaks were more annoying than substantial and I had doubts anyone's ears - least of all pat's - were good enough to hear such changes. I agree with arguments that he _might_ have some sort of attention-seeking personality. But did I complain and try to change this wayward poster's ways? No.. I put him on my ignore list with a click. Problem solved. Lovely feature by the way Wmcmanus.


----------



## Agnostic

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *infinitesymphony* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_What exactly do you mean by "time invariant?" Do you mean "constantly changing over time" or "remains constant over time?"

 Just curious... If you're asking the former, in what ways do cables constantly change over time?

 If you're asking the latter, then it's no different from measuring any theoretically nonlinear system--for example, visiting the audiologist for a hearing test.


 Here's an example: Power cables with inadequate shielding allow external noise (RFI, EMI) into a device. Once the power enters the device, the filters in the power supply don't work well enough to compensate for the level of noise present. Thus, audio quality is affected.

 In an ideal world, every piece of gear would clean up the incoming power so that it was perfect. But, that's not so easy to implement, which is why many people add power conditioners and regenerators to a system. This is a personal anecdote, but I've heard sound quality differences that depended only upon how a component was plugged in (ex. surge strip, power conditioner, the wall). In my experience, the best sound came straight from the wall outlets. Then again, I'm living in a house where there aren't any high-powered devices on the same circuit as my audio equipment. People living in places like inner-city apartment complexes may find that the sound is significantly better through a conditioner.

 In other words, the quality of incoming power affects sound quality, and the cable is but one step in that chain. I don't necessarily advocate going nuts with the budget for a power cable; like interconnects, there's a point where the improvements are small enough not to be worthwhile (and that point may end with stock power cables). My point is that a power cable should at least be capable of transferring the power with minimal degradation._

 

Ok, there's a theory! Finally! Thanks! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 First of all I never disagreed with the fact that a power cable should at least be capable of transferring the power, maybe not with _minimal degradation_ as you put it but at least within the working parameters of the attached appliance. The question is how do you define degradation (except for perhaps super-conductors there is always signal degradation in a conductor), and what is a meaningful level of it considering what the power supply does to the AC. 

 Now for the questions:

 1. Are there any measurements showing a difference between two different quality cables in the DC_behind_ the power supply? 
 If so:
 2. Are these differences measurable in the audio signal?
 If so:
 3. Are they audible?


----------



## WindowsX

I don't know 1
 I don't know 2
 But it's AUDIBLE and MUST HAVE (Do I look like a mad scientist so badly?)


----------



## Agnostic

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I don't know 1
 I don't know 2
 But it's AUDIBLE and MUST HAVE (Do I look like a mad scientist so badly?)_

 

Look we already _know_ you hear a difference. I'm not doubting that you do. It just doesn't prove that there is an objective difference. I thought you must have understood that point by now after it has been made time and time again in the clearest fashion by several persons. This is why you need some form of double blind testing and/or at least some form of measurement (let me ad for tourmaline here:at the right place in the chain and of the relevant properties) to have supporting evidence for the claim of an objectively audible difference. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 And this is the last time I explain this point to anyone who has already read it before. If you still don't get it it's either because you are not capable of understanding a basic matter of methodology or because you don't want to understand.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Agnostic* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Ok, there's a theory! Finally! Thanks! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 First of all I never disagreed with the fact that a power cable should at least be capable of transferring the power, maybe not with minimal degradation as you put it but at least within the working parameters of the attached appliance. The question is how do you define degradation (except for perhaps super-conductors there is always signal degradation in a conductor), and what is a meaningful level of it considering what the power supply does to the AC. 

 Now for the questions:

 1. Are there any measurements showing a difference between two different quality cables in the DCbehind the power supply? 
 If so:
 2. Are these differences measurable in the audio signal?
 If so:
 3. Are they audible?_

 

You're making a little mistake here.

 if any, you have to measure the incomming AC from the powercable into the powersection of the amplifier because after conversion it is DC and the smoothing caps in your powersection ARE responcable for the quality of the DC. So, the better the caps in your powersection, the better your amp will sound.

 If you wanna measure the quality of the cables, you have to directly measure the incomming signal at the joints/pcb where the AC is comming in.

 The three compononents thought to make the most difference in sound in cables are capacitance, inductance and the insulator. Capacitance is related to the inductor though. It is more and more believed that the type of insulator has the biggest impact on the sound of a cable.

 If this is not the case, then the only logical explaination could be that the sum of all variables, like capacitance, inductance, resistance etc. are influencing the damping factor, wich in return alters the frequency responce in an amp and how well an amp performs.

 there is something that makes the cables sound different. Is it the material or an electrical behavier between the cable and the amplifier.


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *infinitesymphony* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_What exactly do you mean by "time invariant?" Do you mean "constantly changing over time" or "remains constant over time?"

 Just curious... If you're asking the former, in what ways do cables constantly change over time?_

 

time invariant, IIRC, means constant over time. _What I said was cable is non time invariant, or time variant_




 cable's RLC parameter, at least according to the lumped wire model, changes wrt to the frequency. Even at 60hz fundamental (AC), there are additional harmonics/noise that's added on to that fundamental. 

 So if we look at cable from a nonlinear time variant point of view, it's difficult to analysis and measure the effects of cable. (measure cable at DC, which most cable manufacturers do is a pure waste of time)


 <I have this urge to rejoin IEEE and go to one of their meets so I can ask some folks about this question>


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_finally I can bump this one without any concern of getting buried 3 pages back within 5 min 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

The funny thing is ,and i repeatedly stated this in any cable thread, that every speaker or organical instrument is tuned by the ear! Not with measuring instruments, but by humans trained to listen to musical instruments or speakers so they can tweak the sound they think is right!

 Piano's are tuned by specialists by ear. Violins are made by ear.
 And especially audio, in the last stages are tweaked by ear! Wich caps, wich internal cables etc.

 So apperntly no manufacturer thinks the same as cable spectics and only use instruments. Instruments give you a nice clue, nothing more, nothing less, only your ears tell you how it actually sounds in a system.

 Does looking at the measuring instrument makes the sound any better, no it doesn't, a better cable does!


----------



## LawnGnome

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You're making a little mistake here.

 if any, you have to measure the incomming AC from the powercable into the powersection of the amplifier because after conversion it is DC and the smoothing caps in your powersection ARE responcable for the quality of the DC. So, the better the caps in your powersection, the better your amp will sound.

 If you wanna measure the quality of the cables, you have to directly measure the incomming signal at the joints/pcb where the AC is comming in.

 The three compononents thought to make the most difference in sound in cables are capacitance, inductance and the insulator. Capacitance is related to the inductor though. It is more and more believed that the type of insulator has the biggest impact on the sound of a cable.

 If this is not the case, then the only logical explaination could be that the sum of all variables, like capacitance, inductance, resistance etc. are influencing the damping factor, wich in return alters the frequency responce in an amp and how well an amp performs.

 there is something that makes the cables sound different. Is it the material or an electrical behavier between the cable and the amplifier._

 

No, you are wrong.

 The claim is that the power cables make an audible difference. 

 You listen to the system as a whole.

 So you measure the entire system as a whole.

 However, since the claim is it provides better AC, which in turn supposedly makes the DC cleaner. You can just measure the DC to see if there is a change.

 If the DC output is the same, then obviously any effects the cord might have on the AC, are not transferred to the DC, which in turn cannot be transferred to the audible sounds produced.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_time invariant, IIRC, means constant over time. What I said was cable is non time invariant, or time variant




 cable's RLC parameter, at least according to the lumped wire model, changes wrt to the frequency. Even at 60hz fundamental (AC), there are additional harmonics/noise that's added on to that fundamental. 

 So if we look at cable from a nonlinear time variant point of view, it's difficult to analysis and measure the effects of cable. (measure cable at DC, which most cable manufacturers do is a pure waste of time)


 <I have this urge to rejoin IEEE and go to one of their meets so I can ask some folks about this question>_

 


 Problem is also that the crystal structure has influence on the frequency responce on a cable. We all know by now that not all frequencies go through the cable at the same time. Also we know that the higher frequencies are more effected then the lower regions in a cable. This could explain why some cables, especially silver and silverplated copper have extended highs. maybe the high frequency repsonce is not as much effected and has more detail comming through.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *LawnGnome* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_No, you are wrong.

 The claim is that the power cables make an audible difference. 

 You listen to the system as a whole.

 So you measure the entire system as a whole.

 However, since the claim is it provides better AC, which in turn supposedly makes the DC cleaner. You can just measure the DC to see if there is a change.

 If the DC output is the same, then obviously any effects the cord might have on the AC, are not transferred to the DC, which in turn cannot be transferred to the audible sounds produced._

 

Nice try, lawngnome, everybody knows the smoothing caps and other caps FILTER the incomming AC to clean DC, so that IS not going to work!

 The only thing that works to see IF the cable IS actually better is to measure the incomming AC before the conversion. Caps have mosty even 5% variance, so that is also out of the question, this could account for small differences!

 Hardwiring the cable, without the plugs, and measuring directly at the incomming point will only show if a cable makes a difference or if they are any better.

 You could measure the DC directly after the conversion, maybe, so it is the cleanest signal going into the amp. This should reveal if any differences are noticable. But again, this is tricky due to the filtering caps. Maybe they filter less if the AC signal is cleaner.

 This shouldn't be to hard to do, i think.


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *LawnGnome* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_No, you are wrong.

 The claim is that the power cables make an audible difference. 

 You listen to the system as a whole.

 So you measure the entire system as a whole.

 However, since the claim is it provides better AC, which in turn supposedly makes the DC cleaner. You can just measure the DC to see if there is a change.

 If the DC output is the same, then obviously any effects the cord might have on the AC, are not transferred to the DC, which in turn cannot be transferred to the audible sounds produced._

 

perfect DC is the magic bullet. Anyone want to build a battery powered amp? oh..wait someone (ASR Emitter) had already done it and its a 4 box monster.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Agnostic* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Ok, there's a theory! Finally! Thanks! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 First of all I never disagreed with the fact that a power cable should at least be capable of transferring the power, maybe not with minimal degradation as you put it but at least within the working parameters of the attached appliance. The question is how do you define degradation (except for perhaps super-conductors there is always signal degradation in a conductor), and what is a meaningful level of it considering what the power supply does to the AC. 

 Now for the questions:

 1. Are there any measurements showing a difference between two different quality cables in the DCbehind the power supply? 
 If so:
 2. Are these differences measurable in the audio signal?
 If so:
 3. Are they audible?_

 

So, you claim that the smoothing caps filter out any advantage of a better cable through conversion into DC?!


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_perfect DC is the magic bullet. Anyone want to build a battery powered amp? oh..wait someone (ASR Emitter) had already done it and its a 4 box monster. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

That IS indeed the trick, better caps, better transformer, all make up for better and cleaner DC. Battery power is cleanest of all and cannot produce a hum!
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Problem with batteries you could have is if they can deliver enough power fast enough.

 It is not for nothing that people say/claim that power is 50% of the sound, it IS true! The better the powersupply and the powersection of an amp or cdplayer is, the better it will sound!

 After modding my amp and especially the powersection, i know this is a fact! Day and night difference!

 But, after the mod and the burn in period of the caps etc. i still can hear the differences between the powercables( stock cable, silverplated copper or high end copper cable).


----------



## tourmaline

But i repeat, this IS off topic. If you wanna discuss this any further, i suggest you start a new thread about it!

 This thread is about patrick's behavier and the responce to that!


----------



## infinitesymphony

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_time invariant, IIRC, means constant over time. What I said was cable is non time invariant, or time variant




 cable's RLC parameter, at least according to the lumped wire model, changes wrt to the frequency. Even at 60hz fundamental (AC), there are additional harmonics/noise that's added on to that fundamental._

 

Ah, gotcha... The "not" earlier in the original sentence threw me off. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 That's pretty interesting (and a little over my head). Perhaps part of a cable's sound signature is determined by its particular harmonic qualities, which in turn are caused by its construction. Something to consider, anyway. I can understand how measuring this sort of effect might be difficult.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Problem is also that the crystal structure has influence on the frequency responce on a cable. We all know by now that not all frequencies go through the cable at the same time. Also we know that the higher frequencies are more effected then the lower regions in a cable. This could explain why some cables, especially silver and silverplated copper have extended highs. maybe the high frequency repsonce is not as much effected and has more detail comming through._

 

I'm not sure that would be true about well-designed pure silver cables since there's only one metal involved, but I've always wondered if that could be true about hybrid silver-plated copper cables. Those two metals have different conductivities... I don't know if the difference between them would be enough to manifest itself as audibly faster/brighter high-frequency response, but it's an interesting theory.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *infinitesymphony* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Ah, gotcha... The "not" earlier in the original sentence threw me off. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 That's pretty interesting (and a little over my head). Perhaps part of a cable's sound signature is determined by its particular harmonic qualities, which in turn are caused by its construction. Something to consider, anyway. I can understand how measuring this sort of effect might be difficult.


 I'm not sure that would be true about well-designed pure silver cables since there's only one metal involved, but I've always wondered if that could be true about hybrid silver-plated copper cables. Those two metals have different conductivities... I don't know if the difference between them would be enough to manifest itself as audibly faster/brighter high-frequency response, but it's an interesting theory._

 

No, it's true for every core, being copper, silver or silverplated copper. The structure of the crystals has influence of how frequencies travel through the core. One single large crystal has less boundaries and therefor has cleaner and betterr frequency responce then other constructed cores. see it as less impurities and more impurities to block frequencies, especially very soft sounding frequencies.

 It's not a theory, most higher end cables allready use these single crystal structures. Ohno has the patent, is the father of this manufaturing process and he measured considderably better frequency responce, less micro detail lost!


----------



## infinitesymphony

19 pages in, I think we've moved past the original discussion... Plus, this is tangentially related to Patrick because it deals with the possibility that his cable tweaks might cause audible differences in sound quality.


----------



## Jahn

i tried to steer it back to the OP too but the cable crew steamrollered right over that well intentioned detour


----------



## earwicker7

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I know what a good powersection of an amp looks like, lots of good caps in there for powerreserve and smoothing caps, for clean power!

 The transformer is actually the thing in the middle, and the cap is right next to it. You see those copper traces going to the sockets?, the one in the center actually starts at the transformer. The way i see it, at the right it's the smoothing part of the transformer, at the left probably the high frequency filter and the electronics left in front are for manipulating the waveform? The reddish round thing next to the black square converter is also a transformer or a spool.

 So actually this thing is filtering the AC and cleans it and then provides it to the sockets on the back of the thor.

 Actually, dirty AC in, clean(er) AC out.

 Also the valhalla cable used has big influence on how this powerplant sounds, the valhalla is one of the best cables around._

 

Cool. Thanks for clearing this up... it's very helpful to know how this stuff actually works.


----------



## philodox

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *LawnGnome* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_If you think people call patrick insane because of his cables, you are wrong. We call him insane because of the dozens of absurd videos he posts here, and his obsessive compulsiveness, and complete lack of rationality._

 

Exactly. The fact that he advocates Valhalla is besides the point.

 EDIT: I also would like to point out that I have nothing against Patrick, but think that he might benefit from getting out more often and perhaps more human companionship.


----------



## NotoriousBIG_PJ

Anyone who doesn't use at least $3k interconnects out of their ipod isn't truely hearing their ipod.

 Biggie.


----------



## philodox

I read through around half of this thread and I think this is the last cable thread I'll be reading for quite a while.

 I am a 'mild believer' for the record. I believe the differences I hear and try not to go into comparative listening with preconceived ideas. I don't discount science, but don't believe that it has all the answers. I find these cable discussions interesting enough, but the arrogance and mean spirit has risen to a level where I doubt anything meaningful can be said about it any more... or at least not on this forum. Good luck to the 'nice guys' that are still trying to make this go somewhere. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 To clarify: The 'arrogance and mean spirit' can be seen on both sides of the fence. I am not just attacking the skeptics with this comment.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *NotoriousBIG_PJ* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Anyone who doesn't use at least $3k interconnects out of their ipod isn't truely hearing their ipod.

 Biggie._

 

Even if you know that most mp3 files are hard cut off at 16khz anyway? I bet most rip cd's to mp3 at standard setting, this means you cannot go higher then the 16khz. 

 I own Nordost, i like the cables, they are really good, but as you can read in other threads, i clearly say they aint for everybody.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *philodox* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I read through around half of this thread and I think this is the last cable thread I'll be reading for quite a while.

 I am a 'mild believer' for the record. I believe the differences I hear and try not to go into comparative listening with preconceived ideas. I don't discount science, but don't believe that it has all the answers. I find these cable discussions interesting enough, but the arrogance and mean spirit has risen to a level where I doubt anything meaningful can be said about it any more... or at least not on this forum. Good luck to the 'nice guys' that are still trying to make this go somewhere. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 To clarify: The 'arrogance and mean spirit' can be seen on both sides of the fence. I am not just attacking the skeptics with this comment._

 

I am with you on this one; i am curious, i wanna know why i am hearing what i hear or why somebody else can't. 

 But most of the time, people who hear a difference between cables get provoked. Then it very fast turns nasty.

 I've had a few cable threads now and i learned alot about audio, from both sides. I go on my business again.

 Now i know why i am hearing what i am hearing.

 In the end, i don't care what people are using if they have fun listening to music (either cheap or very expensive). We don't have to loose this out of sight; having fun listening to music is why we're into audio anyway.

 To make it sound beter so we even have more fun listening to the music.

 I better get listening to the rig again. This is giving way more pleasure.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Jahn* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_i tried to steer it back to the OP too but the cable crew steamrollered right over that well intentioned detour
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

I did this at least 3 times throughout the thread without any success.


----------



## LawnGnome

Tourmaline, you must realize that cleaner DC only has measurable(not necessarily audible) effects up to a point.

 Cleaner DC only lets the components work to their best potential. After a point though, no matter what you try to due to make the DC better, it won't make a difference.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *LawnGnome* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Tourmaline, you must realize that cleaner DC only has measurable(not necessarily audible) effects up to a point.

 Cleaner DC only lets the components work to their best potential. After a point though, no matter what you try to due to make the DC better, it won't make a difference._

 

 I am not so sure about that, since every cap has it's own specific sound due to the frequency it can filter or let through. Larger caps have in general better low frequency responce and smaller caps, say 1ufarad and under, less good low frequency responce. If you take tube amps, some designs use coupler caps and you can pretty much tweak the sound to your liking with better caps; better low and top end and more detail.

 For filtering, yes, there is a limit, there isn't any more after it is allready good.
 But, caps have a noisefloor and the red nx caps of black gate have the lowest noisefloor of any cap, hence they sound very clean. Some even use both a small and a large cap in parallel to get the best filtering or signal possible.
 So, there still are alot of tweaks to maximize clean power!

 I am pretty sure with the mod and loads of high end caps in there, i pretty much maxed things out.

 But the fact (for me) remains that i still hear the difference between the 3 cables, even though everything is maxed out in the amp, especially the filtering in the powersupply. And in my case, external passive filtering makes things worse; less detail!


----------



## Roam

Here's a tip. Use platinum-iridium cables. With our increasingly polluted air, oxidation and/or corrosion has become a significant problem for all lesser cables. Copper, silver, palladium, and even gold can be attacked by the crud which now fills our air.


----------



## WindowsX

Hey. I have an idea. Let's give up pulling them up from the wormholes, shall we? They're happy with "dirty air" inside that and it seems like "good air" above the ground is insignificant for them so it's better to let they stay in where they please.


----------



## LawnGnome

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Hey. I have an idea. Let's give up pulling them up from the wormholes, shall we? They're happy with "dirty air" inside that and it seems like "good air" above the ground is insignificant for them so it's better to let they stay in where they please._

 

You think it is some sort of personal thing?

 You must not know what a debate is.


----------



## WindowsX

Yes. This is a personal thing. It's the exactly same idea as "$50 headphone is good enough", really. I tried telling my friends and offer them listening to over $300 full sizes and they said $50 is enough, just like these cables. So trying to categorize cables in different terms of cheap headphones sounds kinda wrong for my logic.


----------



## fwojciec

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Yes. This is a personal thing. It's the exactly same idea as "$50 headphone is good enough", really. I tried telling my friends and offer them listening to over $300 full sizes and they said $50 is enough, just like these cables. So trying to categorize cables in different terms of cheap headphones sounds kinda wrong for my logic._

 

You are not going to either impress or convince anyone with such arguments or with the analogy you're making here. Logic, by the way, is not something that is, or could be, either yours or mine; it simply is, and it can be used to distinguish between what is logical and what isn't. 

 I don't think anyone on this forum would dispute the claim that it is possible to tell $50 and $300 headphones apart - the difference between them is real in the sense that they measure differently in objective terms. Whether one is capable of hearing that difference or not is an entirely separate question, it is a problem of the competence of the listener at detecting the differences we know to exist.

 The situation is completely different in the case of cables, since there is no data or even a viable theory to support the claim that vastly expensive power cables can improve the sound in any objective sense, for example. Therefore people who claim to hear differences between such cables are either hearing something we cannot measure (though no one has been able to suggest what it might be, and how it could be that it can affect the sound), or, what seems like an at least equally worthy hypothesis, are somehow convincing themselves that the difference really exists even though it does not. Obviously it is impossible to talk in terms of competence in this context.


----------



## LawnGnome

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Yes. This is a personal thing. It's the exactly same idea as "$50 headphone is good enough", really. I tried telling my friends and offer them listening to over $300 full sizes and they said $50 is enough, just like these cables. So trying to categorize cables in different terms of cheap headphones sounds kinda wrong for my logic._

 

If you take this disagreement on cables personally. That is a problem. But it is your problem.

 Don't make this personal, because it is not. It is two differing opinions, each trying to explain and prove their side. That is all.

 When people take this stuff personally, they have a problem, and should step back and look at why it is affecting their emotions.


----------



## Logistics

I bought a set of multi-media speakers in the mid-90's called EP-80's. They are two-way enclosures consisting of 4" woofers and IIRC 3/4" poly-dome tweeters. I liked them, but with the influx of the internet, I started getting into audio. In this case I had a hankering to change the internal wiring of these enclosures if I concluded they were inadequate. So this became my project!

 I opened the enclosures up, one of which housed the amplifier/transformer, and found them to be wired with extremely small gauge wire; the likes of 20-22 gauge, which when cut or scraped, showed no trace of copper. Likely, something extremely cheap. Everything was wired with this; the drivers, the jacks, etc. The only exception being the wires going to and coming from the transformer which were bulkier.

 I decided to rewire everything with 16 gauge Radio Shack Megacable. I also removed the 3.5mm jacks which ran power from the amp in the left enclosure to the right and filled them, instead installing an additional RCA jack on the back of each enclosure and making a cable out of the same 16 gauge speaker cable. Afterwards, it was like listening to an entirely different set of speakers. There was tons more bass, the highs were now crisp and clear. Again, like a totally different set of speakers. I always felt it was because the gauge was too inadequate, but people always come back telling me that over the few inches at a time that were running inside that enclosure, it shouldn't have made a difference, so was it simply moving to copper cable? I don't know, but there was a difference, and it was too huge to be placebo.


----------



## Wmcmanus

Just curious if you guys have seen this video about Ben Underwood, the 14 year old kid who navigates by listening to echos with amazing agility. As I watch this and think about my "normal" sense of hearing I'm utterly amazed by it, but to him it's actually quite simple. His ears are trained in ways that I can't imagine. He hears things that we can't? Or simply that we don't? Or that we do but don't realize? I'm not sure, are you? Check it out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DpBm4KoWsrY

 If you've watched the video (either now or previously, as I think it may have been discussed in a previous thread) and still don't think that humans can perceive sonic differences caused by the varying materials used in cables (or, as I'm sure some of you will insist on putting it, even Ben couldn't hear the differences because the differences don't exist to begin with), then I must applaud you for your commitment to the "cause" of being right. 

 At the same time, I've got to wonder (and I don't know because I'm not too "smart" when it comes to scientific things) whether all of our fancy man made measuring devices could even pick up on the things he can pick up on with his own two ears; and thus whether in fact his own two ears comprise an even more sophisticated measuring device than the measuring devices that are designed to measure such things; and thus whether our own two untrained ears might be just as good as Ben's ears, only we don't realize what their true potential is; that in fact, not only are we capable of hearing those same things that Ben hears, but that we actually do hear them, just not a a conscious level. 

 In other words, our ears may well be hearing sounds that our minds don't process in a meaningful way due to our lack of training, and with our eyes wide open we may never come to this realization at a conscious level. But of course, at night, with our eyes closed and headphones on, for maybe an hour here and an hour there, if we can relax enough to really let it happen, we can (kind of, sort of) begin to hear like a blind child who has never known any different can hear. Maybe, under this theory, the more we listen to our headphones, at night with eyes closed and attention rapt, for several hours each night, night after night for years on end as we immerse ourselves deeper into the headphone listening hobby, then maybe, just maybe, if indeed cables can make slight differences, then perhaps we might be able to hear those differences.

 I know I do. Put that in your "show me the money" pipe and smoke it!


----------



## Chu

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I know I do. Put that in your "show me the money" pipe and smoke it!_

 

All of this ignores the fact that from a skeptic's position the ears are still the ultimate tool. It's just a lot of care has to be taken that it's _just_ the ears that are effecting your perception of sound when asking the types of questions we do in this forum.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *LawnGnome* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_If you take this disagreement on cables personally. That is a problem. But it is your problem.

 Don't make this personal, because it is not. It is two differing opinions, each trying to explain and prove their side. That is all.

 When people take this stuff personally, they have a problem, and should step back and look at why it is affecting their emotions._

 


 Agreed lawngnome, it's just an opinion. Both can use what they like and both sides try to explain why they use cheap cables or why some use high end cables. Both are in their own right to use what they like and to express what they feel about cables.

 In the end, personal taste and personal objectivity comes into play.
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 For some 50 bucks for a cable is reasonable, for some others 3000 is barely enough, but both can have pleasure in listening to their rig or music!

 What cables can't do and especially measuring instrument can't do is tell us how much pleasure you get from listening to music.

 If we agree to disagree we have at least some space for debate.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *fwojciec* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You are not going to either impress or convince anyone with such arguments or with the analogy you're making here. Logic, by the way, is not something that is, or could be, either yours or mine; it simply is, and it can be used to distinguish between what is logical and what isn't. 

 I don't think anyone on this forum would dispute the claim that it is possible to tell $50 and $300 headphones apart - the difference between them is real in the sense that they measure differently in objective terms. Whether one is capable of hearing that difference or not is an entirely separate question, it is a problem of the competence of the listener at detecting the differences we know to exist.

 The situation is completely different in the case of cables, since there is no data or even a viable theory to support the claim that vastly expensive power cables can improve the sound in any objective sense, for example. Therefore people who claim to hear differences between such cables are either hearing something we cannot measure (though no one has been able to suggest what it might be, and how it could be that it can affect the sound), or, what seems like an at least equally worthy hypothesis, are somehow convincing themselves that the difference really exists even though it does not. Obviously it is impossible to talk in terms of competence in this context._

 

Are you kidding?! There are loads of theories on cables, practical ones and theoretical ones. Both have been put to the test and even cable sceptics prove that there are things happening inside a cable, *all they/we don't agree upon is the fact if it is audible or not.* To some it is, to some it isn't.

 But denying there aren't things happening in cables is even debuncked by the most sceptical sceptics.

 Some even have patents on special production methods of making a core. (single crystal structure).

 Insulator can be measured, capacitance can be measured, inductance can be measured, resistance can be measured, loss of frequency responce can be measured.

 And as the figures show, the best measuring cables also sound best.

*In the end, it's just a matter of taste, willing to spend money and how pleased you are with the current cables you're using*. If you're satisfied with a relatively cheap cable, fine with me. I am pleased with more expensive cable. Both are happy, i don't see the problem here.

 I've never heard somebody complain about a high end cable, especially not those that have very expensive cables, without an exception, they are very satisfied with the quality, and i mean sound quality. The people having a problem with it, are the people not willing to spend as much on cables.

 I have heard people complain about stock cables not performing optimal however!


----------



## Wmcmanus

Referring to my previous post about the video I linked to, Chu said:

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Chu* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_*All of this ignores the fact that from a skeptic's position the ears are still the ultimate tool. * It's just a lot of care has to be taken that it's just the ears that are effecting your perception of sound when asking the types of questions we do in this forum._

 

The point was exactly that and didn't ignore that at all. The blind kid uses just his ears to hear things that we think of as unimaginable. Yet there is no reason, a priori, that at his birth he could be expected to have been given exceptional hearing. His hearing ability at birth was, much more likely than not, completely normal and average in every sense of the word. Yet, over time he developed an uncanny ability to hear things that we (much more likely than not) have the ability to hear just as he does. The difference is that he has developed his sense of hearing to a far greater degree than we have out of a sense of necessity. It has become natural to him whereas is would seem impossible to us, but the inate ability resides within all of us. Why? Because our ears are extraordinary instruments capable of amazing things.

 So yes, the ears are still the ultimate tool but blind tests don't necessarily reveal their ultimate abilities because, in the ultimate sense, much of what our ears have to offer us has remained an untapped resource due to a lack of proper training, discipline and exercise of their capabilities. Thus, by extension, the more experienced and "trained" one's ears are (whether formally by those who have studied audiology, for instance, or informally by those who are highly experienced audiophiles) the more likely they will be able to hear subtle differences caused by cables (in the dark and blind tested), or at least be able to recognize that they are hearing it. 

 More importantly, what young Ben Underwood suggests to me, is that we all, at some level at least, have the inate ability to hear a lot of things that our minds simply can't process at a conscious level. That the measuring instruments designed to calibrate fequency response curves cannot pick up on the subtle differences that cables make doesn't necessarily mean that the human ear cannot! The human ear is capable of hearing in an infinite array of "shades of grey", perhaps even to an order of magnitude that is beyond measure by standard instruments. One's hearing, or more aptly, listening, ability in turn sends signals to the brain which translate into varying degrees of musical enjoyment.

 I'm not necessarily saying that all of this is true, only that what I'm seeing in the video about Ben tells me that it's entirely possible and that on a perceptual level these differences may indeed be much larger than on any measured level that we're familiar with. To some people, Monet's work is infinitely more complex than Matisse's work. To others, they look pretty much the same in terms of the degree of complexity in the visible picture that emerges. But what matters to those who think these things matter are the layers underneath that most people tend not to see immediately (and thus don't think they matter). If you can see it, it matters; if you can hear it, it matters! But the beauty in all of this is that we can all see it if we look close (assuming "normal" eyesight) and we can all hear it if we listen carefully. Or so I would posit given what Ben has achieved with his exceptionally well developed listening skills. We might not ever get there, but we could get a lot closer than we are now if it mattered enough to us (as it obviously did to him). 

 Thus for the casual listener, Rat Shack cables do the trick and it immediately becomes senseless to them to spend on dime more on "improvements" that they can't hear and might not appreciate even if they did (in a blind test, that is). For others, there is something underneath the music, layers that they hadn't heard before, that suddenly emerges in the right audio system. They can and do hear differences in cables and feel the presence of these differences as the music pulses through their veins. 

 But then again, I could just be full of sh!t like everyone else. I don't know the answers to this phenomenon any more than anyone else does, so I'm only speculating, I'm not trying to pretend anything. As with philodox, I'm a mild believer that cables make a difference but find it to be a rather sad state of affairs that some people love to argue for their side rather than joining a discussion with an interest in learning from the points of view expressed by others. Said another way, he who yells loudest doesn't necessarily win, unless of course, he's using the right cables.


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_But of course, at night, with our eyes closed and headphones on, for maybe an hour here and an hour there, if we can relax enough to really let it happen, we can (kind of, sort of) begin to hear like a blind child who has never known any different can hear._

 

I think that your example demonstrates the very point that we skeptics seem to be attacked vociferously for making. The brain plays a huge role in interpreting what we hear and how we hear it. It seems to me that everyone, regardless of which side of the argument they are on, agree that the brain plays a role in determining what we hear, and that our state of mind can impact the way that we hear sound. Even Patrick and tourmaline acknowledged this to be true the last time we went around on this debate in the "Is copper warmer because of signal loss" thread. 

 I don't question that there may be situations, such as the one that you describe in your example, where we are more focused on what we are hearing and where we hear "more" than we would in ordinary listening situations. So if, under those circumstances, we hear a difference between two things where we haven't heard a difference before, then the question becomes: is the difference the result of (a) some difference in what we are listening to, (b) a difference in the way that our brains are perceiving what we are listening to, or (c) some combination of both?


----------



## Black Stuart

Wmcmanus,
 very well put argument but what you fail to mention is that for most peple who use Head-fi, I bet that most do not live anything like a 'normal' life or live in anything like a 'normal' environment.

 I used to live on the south coast of England and every weekend 'Londoners' would erupt out of the trains. Always easy to tell them from locals by their pasty city faces but especially by the noise they made - they don't talk, they shout and why - because they live (exist?) in an environment that is polluted day and night by noise - not sound, noise.

 Indeed many city people are literally terrified by space and yes, silence. I now live in Spain and thanks to centuries of indoctrination by a particular form of sky fairy worship they have become terrified of silence and space, incredible but true. I live in a part of Spain that can only be described as 'big country' my lady and I share it only with sheperds. These Spanish simply don't see it because it frightens them (it might be full of bogeymen) they are obsessed with making noise because the Devil maybe lurking in the silence.

 So, as you said we all have the ability to hear, see and sense far more than the majority of us do. If you don't use an ability it will wither away, language is a prime example but what if you have never really used the ability to hear.

 For all those who are obsessed with science (like it is something immutable - go look at history) I had a 'scientific' hearing test a few years and was told that I have approx. 15% above average hearing. How is this possible. Well when rock n' roll came on the scene in the 60s', a lot of carpetbaggers came on the music scene just to make money. They could'nt play, so what did their managers do - that's right they turned up the amps so that you could'nt hear the crap sounds that were being made.

 Disco was the same, so what did I do - easy, stop going to discos or walked out of a music venue when all I could hear was noise. Many of my contempories did'nt and now have profound hearing problems.

 The skeptics may not like it but I'll bet that many live/work in noisy surroundings (and are probably completely unaware of this fact) have lousy hearing and/or a rigid mind set.

 I find their almost universal use of the word 'believers' to be offensive - I don't believe in sky fairies/ personality cults or any other crap like that. There is reality and there are fantasies - I'll take reality every time - if I hear something, then I hear it - It is that simple.

 It seems to me that with a lot of skeptics - they are not the least bit interested in music, they never create anything themselves (fear, lack of ability) and maybe there is more than a dash of jealousy directed at those that can. 

 I don't have to prove anything to anybody and indeed I'm not aware of anyone who can hear differences who has ever tried to do that on Head-fi or elsewhere, we merely state what we have found as individuals.

 No, it's these 'fanatical believers in science' - I don't trust my own ears (the shrinks can work that one out) who want everyone to agree with them.

 If you eating a very well prepared and tasty meal - do you discuss it or do you eat it and so enjoy it. There are those who spend a fortune on a sound system but they never listen to the music, only the 'sounds' their system is making - quite sad really are'nt they.

 Do you have to spend a lot of money to hear more detail, more depth than stock cables no - you can make your own.

 If all cables sound the same - because the measuring instruments say they do - are you sure your in the right hobby? just a thought.


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Black Stuart* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_It seems to me that with a lot of skeptics - they are not the least bit interested in music, they never create anything themselves (fear, lack of ability) and maybe there is more than a dash of jealousy directed at those that can._

 

This sort of invective really does nothing to advance your argument and is also simply factually wrong. I am a working musician. I perform upwards of 200 times per year, in orchestras, jazz bands and rock bands. I've recorded four independently-released CDs, and I've worked as a session musician on others. In the month of September, I've had 15 musical "services"--3 on guitar, 11 on electric and upright bass, and 1 doing live sound.

  Quote:


 No, it's these 'fanatical believers in science' - I don't trust my own ears (the shrinks can work that one out) who want everyone to agree with them. 
 

I'm having a good deal of difficulty reconciling the position that you posted above with what you've written elsewhere on Head-Fi in a thread about cable burn-in, in which you seem to acknowledge the validity of using blind tests, and in which you characterized some boutique cables as "snake oil" and a "waste of money":

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Black Stuart* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_For those that disagree with my statement have you done 'for real' blind tests. 

 Humanmedia EEs don't believe in anything - they use test data to evaluate. I belong to a forum where we are really lucky we have an electrical engineer with over 40 years experience. When I first got into building valve amps I could'nt accept his matter of fact answers, including most boutique components were a 'waste of money', likewise expensive, laced with 'snake oil' cables. Time and personal experience has taught me that he is right.

 I should add that this man John Caswell helped to set up FM radio in South Africa/Radio Galicia (Spain) he finished his working career for a major US co. in London as their cheif engineer. Take a look at Rod Elliot's site ESP - if you have an open mind read all his numerous articles (they are very easy to take in) and you won't have to believe - you will have understood.

 Stuart_


----------



## Patrick82

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Black Stuart* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Wmcmanus,
 very well put argument but what you fail to mention is that for most peple who use Head-fi, I bet that most do not live anything like a 'normal' life or live in anything like a 'normal' environment.

 I used to live on the south coast of England and every weekend 'Londoners' would erupt out of the trains. Always easy to tell them from locals by their pasty city faces but especially by the noise they made - they don't talk, they shout and why - because they live (exist?) in an environment that is polluted day and night by noise - not sound, noise._

 

The skeptics yell while the audiophiles whisper. That's why one skeptic makes a louder sound than a thousand audiophiles. In these cable threads there are only a few skeptics yelling while the thousands of believers are quiet.


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Patrick82* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The skeptics yell while the audiophiles whisper._

 

... and the people who are just looking to call attention to themselves post disturbing videos on youtube.


----------



## Patrick82

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_... and the people who are just looking to call attention to themselves post disturbing videos on youtube._

 

Which video is disturbing?


----------



## Agnostic

Still no viable theories, conclusive ABX test or anything else even remotely substantial added from the cable camp I see.

 Just more repetitions of the same _but I can hear it therefore it must exist_ claims, and _you guys are just jeallous useless bastards who never created a thing in their lives_ style ad hominems. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			











 Somebody please give me a call when they come up with something even vaguely resembling a distant relative of a semblance of a relevant fact? Thanks!


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_... and the people who are just looking to call attention to themselves post disturbing videos on youtube._

 






 maybe he's practising his cameraman abilities...his last video's were in the style of The Blair Witch Project.

 Good thing you're not forced to look at the video's


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Agnostic* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Still no viable theories, conclusive ABX test or anything else even remotely substantial added from the cable camp I see.

 Just more repetitions of the same but I can hear it therefore it must exist claims, and you guys are just jeallous useless bastards who never created a thing in their lives style ad hominems. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	










 Somebody please give me a call when they come up with something even vaguely resembling a distant relative of a semblance of a relevant fact? Thanks! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

Well, if you don't read all pages of a thread, you won't learn anything. Is it!

 It seems you are very selective and only read what you wanna read. This is enough information for me.

 Your mind is set like some others on this forum.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Patrick82* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Which video is disturbing?_

 

He's talking about your last "The Blair Witch Project" video's.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Although, in this video, the good sound didnt go away magically, but got better and better.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Black Stuart* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Wmcmanus,
 very well put argument but what you fail to mention is that for most peple who use Head-fi, I bet that most do not live anything like a 'normal' life or live in anything like a 'normal' environment.

 I used to live on the south coast of England and every weekend 'Londoners' would erupt out of the trains. Always easy to tell them from locals by their pasty city faces but especially by the noise they made - they don't talk, they shout and why - because they live (exist?) in an environment that is polluted day and night by noise - not sound, noise.

 Indeed many city people are literally terrified by space and yes, silence. I now live in Spain and thanks to centuries of indoctrination by a particular form of sky fairy worship they have become terrified of silence and space, incredible but true. I live in a part of Spain that can only be described as 'big country' my lady and I share it only with sheperds. These Spanish simply don't see it because it frightens them (it might be full of bogeymen) they are obsessed with making noise because the Devil maybe lurking in the silence.

 So, as you said we all have the ability to hear, see and sense far more than the majority of us do. If you don't use an ability it will wither away, language is a prime example but what if you have never really used the ability to hear.

 For all those who are obsessed with science (like it is something immutable - go look at history) I had a 'scientific' hearing test a few years and was told that I have approx. 15% above average hearing. How is this possible. Well when rock n' roll came on the scene in the 60s', a lot of carpetbaggers came on the music scene just to make money. They could'nt play, so what did their managers do - that's right they turned up the amps so that you could'nt hear the crap sounds that were being made.

 Disco was the same, so what did I do - easy, stop going to discos or walked out of a music venue when all I could hear was noise. Many of my contempories did'nt and now have profound hearing problems.

 The skeptics may not like it but I'll bet that many live/work in noisy surroundings (and are probably completely unaware of this fact) have lousy hearing and/or a rigid mind set.

 I find their almost universal use of the word 'believers' to be offensive - I don't believe in sky fairies/ personality cults or any other crap like that. There is reality and there are fantasies - I'll take reality every time - if I hear something, then I hear it - It is that simple.

 It seems to me that with a lot of skeptics - they are not the least bit interested in music, they never create anything themselves (fear, lack of ability) and maybe there is more than a dash of jealousy directed at those that can. 

 I don't have to prove anything to anybody and indeed I'm not aware of anyone who can hear differences who has ever tried to do that on Head-fi or elsewhere, we merely state what we have found as individuals.

 No, it's these 'fanatical believers in science' - I don't trust my own ears (the shrinks can work that one out) who want everyone to agree with them.

 If you eating a very well prepared and tasty meal - do you discuss it or do you eat it and so enjoy it. There are those who spend a fortune on a sound system but they never listen to the music, only the 'sounds' their system is making - quite sad really are'nt they.

 Do you have to spend a lot of money to hear more detail, more depth than stock cables no - you can make your own.

 If all cables sound the same - because the measuring instruments say they do - are you sure your in the right hobby? just a thought._

 

The problem is, science corrects itself through the years and times.

 See popey, spinage was soo good, now they try to tell ya it isn't so good for ya. 

 The ears are soo bad, you cant hear anything with it.......


----------



## Agnostic

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Well, if you don't read all pages of a thread, you won't learn anything. Is it!

 It seems you are very selective and only read what you wanna read. This is enough information for me.

 Your mind is set like some others on this forum._

 

Ah, more accusations! My mind is not set at all. You just have no theory nor any evidence to convince me of your claims. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Furthermore I think I speak for everyone when I say how much we all appreciate your substantial, intelligent and well reasoned contributions to this discussion. In fact they are so wise and deep that they really motivate me to go trawling through every topic you posted in in order to find those hidden pearls of wisdom that _I_ need to support your unfounded claims. Of course this will take me a lot of time and concentration (given the high level of your responses so far), so I would ask you to refrain from posting anything else until I've read up on your previous gems. Thanks!


----------



## earwicker7

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Black Stuart* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_For all those who are obsessed with science (like it is something immutable - go look at history)_

 

I think you're giving the skeptics too much credit. They aren't the least bit interested in science, it's a crutch they use so that they don't have to acknowledge that systems they can't afford are better than their iPods.

 People obsessed with science would be somewhat interested in the fact that OBSERVATION is one of the central tenets of the scientific method. And no, that's not observing a website full of "cut and paste" deniers, that is PERSONALLY listening to different cables. Find me one skeptic who has done this. No, they're too smart for the scientific method.

 Also, the scientific method is based on testing out new hypotheses, otherwise stagnation occurs (as pointed out in the quote above). Again, they aren't willing to do this because they have all the answers.


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *earwicker7* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I think you're giving the skeptics too much credit. They aren't the least bit interested in science, it's a crutch they use so that they don't have to acknowledge that systems they can't afford are better than their iPods._

 

More invective and logical fallacy. The fact that I may not be able to afford an expensive system does not make your assertions any more or less likely to be true.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *earwicker7* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Also, the scientific method is based on testing out new hypotheses, otherwise stagnation occurs (as pointed out in the quote above). Again, they aren't willing to do this because they have all the answers._

 

Actually, not only are we _*willing *_ to do this, we are eager to do it. Unfortunately, we cannot, because the people who make the affirmative claim that they can hear differences among components with similar measures almost invariably refuse to participate in the type of testing that would confirm their claims.


----------



## Agnostic

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *earwicker7* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_People obsessed with science would be somewhat interested in the fact that OBSERVATION is one of the central tenets of the scientific method. And no, that's not observing a website full of "cut and paste" deniers, that is PERSONALLY listening to different cables. Find me one skeptic who has done this. No, they're too smart for the scientific method._

 

So you're denying that perceptual differences in sound perception can occur without an objective change in sound? If so you have just crossed the line into biggots territory. 

 Actually these posts are not even worth replying to. It's all the same pattern, accusations, false claims, repeating what has already been refuted as evidence, low level sophistry and logical fallacies. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	





 P.S. I'm not refering to everyone on the cable side of the argument. Some people have made reasonable attempts to come up with theories or ways of finding a factual difference. (So far they have not succeeded but that's a different matter) I respect that. I just can not respect this kind of meaningless sophistry.


----------



## earwicker7

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Agnostic* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_So you're denying that perceptual differences in sound perception can occur without an objective change in sound? If so you have just crossed the line into biggots territory. _

 

Did you even read my post? I didn't say anything of the sort or, frankly, even come close to broaching this subject. More evidence that you guys do nothing but recycle the same tired arguments without even considering what the other person is saying.


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *earwicker7* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I think you're giving the skeptics too much credit. They aren't the least bit interested in science, it's a crutch they use so that they don't have to acknowledge that systems they can't afford are better than their iPods._

 

All money buys is equipment. To get great sound, you have to use your experience and reasoning. It's perfectly possible to achieve great sound on just about any budget... if you know what you're doing.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## Agnostic

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *earwicker7* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Did you even read my post? I didn't say anything of the sort or, frankly, even come close to broaching this subject. More evidence that you guys do nothing but recycle the same tired arguments without even considering what the other person is saying._

 

Ok, you just proved you're not a biggot. You're merely unable to see the logical implications of your own statements. Congratulations! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 Let me explain to you:
 A. It's a fact that listening can not prove an objective difference in sound, only a perceived difference. (Unless as we've been saying, you're doing a double blind test that shows a statistically significant result)

 B. You say that personally listening to cables provides objective evidence for a difference.

 A and B cannot both be true. Since you made claim B yourself I can hardly assume you don't believe it. Hence by saying B you state A is not true. We already KNOW A IS TRUE. Therefore you're denying an obvious fact.

 Definition of a bigot: A person who is obstinately devoted to prejudices even when these views are challenged or proven to be false.


----------



## earwicker7

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_All money buys is equipment. To get great sound, you have to use your experience and reasoning. It's perfectly possible to achieve great sound on just about any budget... if you know what you're doing.

 See ya
 Steve_

 

I couldn't disagree more. From someone who's owned stuff that runs the gamut from dirt cheap (there were a few years during which I was in an extremely precarious financial rut) to extremely expensive, there's just no comparison. You can probably get a B on the audio test with cheap stuff (although you're more likely to get a D-), but there's no chance, in my opinion, of getting an A+ system on a budget.

 I don't think most people with this belief take tolerances into effect. Mass produced equipment just cannot logistically meet the tolerances of boutique equipment. It's one thing to show the blueprints and lab results of your speakers; it's an entirely different thing to get the same results on the 40,000th speaker produced that month. No mass producing company is going to have their employees spend hours making sure that all of the drivers (which show a huge amount of variance even within the same production run) are matched to within 1% tolerance. You'd be lucky to get 15%. The same goes with every other piece of equipment. As audio is a chain from signal to drivers, those variances in tolerances add up... fast.


----------



## earwicker7

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Agnostic* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Definition of a bigot: A person who is obstinately devoted to prejudices even when these views are challenged or proven to be false._

 

Definition of someone who isn't aware of what an agnostic is even though that is his screen name--Someone who claims to have a belief system based on the idea that you can't know everything but claims to know everything.

 I'm an agnostic. You aren't. You're an atheist.


----------



## Agnostic

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *earwicker7* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Definition of someone who isn't aware of what an agnostic is even though that is his screen name--Someone who claims to have a belief system based on the idea that you can't know everything but claims to know everything.

 I'm an agnostic. You aren't. You're an atheist._

 

Because I don't believe in cables!!? This is hilarious! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	






















 You just proved my whole point. This cable thing is a religion. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



 So continue your worship of Thor and maybe you'll go to audio Valhalla.


----------



## Agent Kang

400+ posts and counting. Patrick is a very interesting topic indeed.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Agnostic* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Ah, more accusations! My mind is not set at all. You just have no theory nor any evidence to convince me of your claims. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Furthermore I think I speak for everyone when I say how much we all appreciate your substantial, intelligent and well reasoned contributions to this discussion. In fact they are so wise and deep that they really motivate me to go trawling through every topic you posted in in order to find those hidden pearls of wisdom that I need to support your unfounded claims. Of course this will take me a lot of time and concentration (given the high level of your responses so far), so I would ask you to refrain from posting anything else until I've read up on your previous gems. Thanks! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

Same here, learn to read. 

 I don't have to post your post again here do i , you stating that you are too lazy reading a thread with loads of scientifical explainations about cables.

 This just shows that you're not really interested, just stir up things.

 Speaking of intelligence.....can you read more then 2 pages?!
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I haven's seen anything scientific from you, only highlighted "show me the money".

 I at least posted some figures about cables, capacitance, resistance, conductance etc.

 Why don't you let off some steam, that's the same thing as electric, isn't it?! If this is about the best thing sceptics can come up with...... 

 Your intelligence is without a doubt shown in this thread. All i can say is: SHOW ME THE MONEY!!!

 But i have a hard time believing you make it even to the next word.

 I think i speak for all cable "believers".

 You have shown enough for me, it doesn't have anything to do with cables or the OP.


----------



## meat01

Quote:


 You can probably get a B on the audio test with cheap stuff (although you're more likely to get a D-), but there's no chance, in my opinion, of getting an A+ system on a budget. 
 

I couldn't disagree more.

 More money does not equal great sound. Sometimes more money just means a better built enclosure out of more expensive materials. The tolerances of boutique equipment can be .00001%, but it doesn't matter a damn if your ears can not tell the difference between 10 ohms and 20 ohms.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Agent Kang* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_400+ posts and counting. Patrick is a very interesting topic indeed._

 

well some people have problems staying on topic, but i think they are to "intelligent" to even notice that.


----------



## WindowsX

Hey.....give it up. Those franks don't *EVEN* have chance to try cables. Forgive their dumbness and enjoy the music. I hope their ears aren't broken because sometimes I also couldn't notice the different between CD player and computer lol.


----------



## rsaavedra

In all fairness, despite the fact that this boy has these amazingly developed hearing abilities, that doesn't really support the claim that cables do cause perceivable sound differences.

 Interestingly, that young man would also need to pass a blind test between cables to support the claim that at least someone can reliably differenciate between two cables.

 I point this out because it wouldn't be enough if you just brought him one cable first, then the other and he claimed "Wow they sound very different". Because in spite of his developed hearing abilities, just two exposures won't clear all doubts with respect to how misleading our own perception can be. The key is to make sure someone or some people can *reliably* identify differences between cables. That's why DBT would be required (apologies mods for mentioning this 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




)

 One comment, Dolphins aren't the only animals that do echo location. Some other examples: Bats, some birds, and some shrews.


 PS. For the record, I'm neither a skeptic, nor a believer; I'm a bit of both. I think I hear differences between some cables, but I'm also quite too aware of how our brains and perception can play tricks on us. I have just suspended belief on this issue till further, more conclusive evidence is available. It wouldn't surprise me or shock me which side, whether cable believers or skeptics, were the ones eventually proved right. That would just let me checkmark one of the facts of life that I have in pending verification status.


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *meat01* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_More money does not equal great sound. Sometimes more money just means a better built enclosure out of more expensive materials. The tolerances of boutique equipment can be .00001%, but it doesn't matter a damn if your ears can not tell the difference between 10 ohms and 20 ohms._

 

Precisely. Also if you have a high end preamp without tone controls or equalization of any kind, I can pretty much guarantee that a cheap amp will sound better. It's not about tolerances. It's about achieving a good balance of sound. Speakers are the only thing I've found where money makes a big difference.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## LawnGnome

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Hey.....give it up. Those franks don't *EVEN* have chance to try cables. Forgive their dumbness and enjoy the music. I hope their ears aren't broken because sometimes I also couldn't notice the different between CD player and computer lol._

 

Now your just insulting people, and not adding anything.

 You are intending to insult people, and that is unacceptable.


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *LawnGnome* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Now your just insulting people, and not adding anything._

 

I think that he would have to post something comprehensible in order to actually insult someone.


----------



## kpeezy

I must be reading the bad posts only, but all of WindowsX's posts do this. All they entail are him telling how much better his ears are than everyone else's. Very annoying.


----------



## WindowsX

That should be my line. I believe all other people who use cables are tired to explain the difference because you guys keep ignoring it. You guys always ask for evidence but always *ignore* the *EXPLAINATION OF EVIDENCE*. Go back and read all 20 pages and see their explainations. Ignoring what you demand for is the most unacceptable thing I've seen so far.


----------



## TheMarchingMule

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Hey.....give it up. Those franks don't *EVEN* have chance to try cables. Forgive their dumbness and enjoy the music. I hope their ears aren't broken because sometimes I also couldn't notice the different between CD player and computer lol._

 

 Quote:


  Originally Posted by *LawnGnome* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Now your just insulting people, and not adding anything.

 You are intending to insult people, and that is unacceptable._

 

 Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I think that he would have to post something comprehensible in order to actually insult someone._

 

 Quote:


  Originally Posted by *kpeezy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I must be reading the bad posts only, but all of WindowsX's posts do this. All they entail are him telling how much better his ears are than everyone else's. Very annoying._

 


 Indeed...if you ever saw/remember his post history, it is full of ignorance and snobbish ideals. It disgusts me that we are still feeding this troll his daily servings.


----------



## WindowsX

And it disgusts me when I see people trying to say cables is ineffective while their ears never meet it. And I guess it's kinda weird speaking about science to people who aren't scientist or just barely know it. cables are carrier and different carrier always brings different sounds. How on earth people never question about changing tube is audible? *THINK!*


----------



## Zorander

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_And it disgusts me when I see people trying to say cables is ineffective while their ears never meet it. And I guess it's kinda weird speaking about science to people who aren't scientist or just barely know it. cables are carrier and different carrier always brings different sounds. How on earth people never question about changing tube is audible? *THINK!*_

 

Except that you are advocating the use of very expensive wires (esp. in relation to the gears they are supposed to _interconnect_). As much as I can hear differences between wires, they are not as large as you would have people believe and as such I find spending big bucks on cables simply absurd. With amps, the additional cost for higher-end models is easily attributable to capacitor number/grade, power supplies number/grade, op-amps, attenuator grade, enclosure quality, filters, etc. With speakers, it is to enclosure quality, woofers/tweeters number/grade, cross-over unit quality, tuning, etc. With wires though, where does all that extra money spent on $1-5K+ cables go beside the metal[size=xx-small]*[/size] wire, insulation and processing (the most plausible explanation but one that needs further clarification on whether/how it improves signal transmission beyond what 'ordinary metal' wire can do)? 

 And given some of your previous statements (esp. the second line on point 3 you made in this post), you do not come across as someone who has studied electricity/electronics at all. I may not have come from an electrical background (I am chemical), but I know better than to make that sort of ignorant statement.

 Regards.

 [size=xx-small]*[/size] By metal, I can mean anything since all metals transmit electricity. Taking into account audio contexts however, I will assume this to be copper, silver or any of their hybrids.


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_cables are carrier and different carrier always brings different sounds._

 

Surely you cannot be suggesting that _every_ cable sounds different from _every_ other cable?


----------



## Vul Kuolun

Comparing the measurable differences of different tubes to the unmeasurable cable-hokuspokus you're advertising is either a sign of beeing shockingly uninformed or plain stupidity. This is hilarious.
 Though i'd nor bet my right kidney that it is possible to distinguish different age-groups of NOS tubes based on their sound sig. Anyway, this is a "hobby" for people with setups missing tone controls.


----------



## meat01

Quote:


 Comparing the measurable differences of different tubes to the unmeasurable cable-hokuspokus you're advertising is either a sign of beeing shockingly uninformed or plain stupidity. 
 

The personal attacks and insults don't help the discussion. Talk about the claims rather than the person.


----------



## Vul Kuolun

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *meat01* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The personal attacks and insults don't help the discussion. Talk about the claims rather than the person._

 

Righty right; but this is so absurd, i can barely control myself.

 But here you go: Tubes produce harmonics. Humans can can hear harmonics over a certain threshold. They even can do it blind. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Besides the treble roll of that a unfortunate combination of in- and outputimpedances and resistance and capatiance of a cable can produce, there's nothing to hear. Period. That's why you have to know if the rat shack or your norse gods cable is playing. Simple as that.


----------



## WindowsX

The same goes to me. *This is absurd, I can barely control myself.* Nobody wonders why tube rolling, opamp rolling sound different and they never question for scientific proofs. But as for cables, it's another story. Many people tried to claim with various approaches but yet all of those aren't enough. I'm feeling like we are proving Fermat's the last theorem and too bad there isn't any cable class in my major. Get real, people. Open your mind and just try to replace stock cables with something more appropriate like 10-20% of your system for cost of each cable. I sometimes wonder if it's not audible for their near 1k or more system because of less than $100 cost and they're expecting some miracles of few extras they aren't willing to pay for...


----------



## Vul Kuolun

.


----------



## chat7

ahhh... just known why Thai's forum now is very calm...


----------



## WindowsX

*Off-topic*
 Let me clear that up to you. Because there isn't any people like Mr. Sunday ... trying to invoke people like me in Thailand's community lately so I can post calmly and no flame war caused by person like him.


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_cables are carrier and different carrier always brings different sounds._

 

 Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Surely you cannot be suggesting that every cable sounds different from every other cable?_

 

 Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Open your mind and just try to replace stock cables with something more appropriate like 10-20% of your system for cost of each cable. I sometimes wonder if it's not audible for their near 1k or more system because of less than $100 cost and they're expecting some miracles of few extras they aren't willing to pay for..._

 

You didn't answer my question earlier, so let me re-ask it in the context of your most recent post. If different cables "always bring different sounds," why is it necessary to spend "10-20% of your system" in order to hear differences?

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Nobody wonders why tube rolling, opamp rolling sound different and they never question for scientific proofs._

 

This statement, of course, is absolutely false. As just one example, search for "Aczel" and the threads that discuss his publication, The Audio Critic.


----------



## WindowsX

Then show me your true statements about cables aren't audible. Don't say that only the ones who proposes needs to show the proof. If you want to disprove it, you have to show yours too! I already explained those in other theads like how cable can re-arrange electron, the medium size that affacts signal flow, the division of left/right/ground, etc. and I don't want to repeat all of those again.


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Then show me your true statements about cables aren't audible._

 

I didn't make an assertion that "cables aren't audible." 

 Can you not answer my question?

 Edit: I see that you edited your post, but you still haven't responded to my question.


----------



## WindowsX

Because electric current that flows from the outlet and source through the stock cables will be distorted and how can you expect lame carrier to bring out perfect sound? If you make an easy test by making the cheapest cable with female to male and see if it sounds different or not.


----------



## Wmcmanus

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_In all fairness, despite the fact that this boy has these amazingly developed hearing abilities, that doesn't really support the claim that cables do cause perceivable sound differences.

 Interestingly, that young man would also need to pass a blind test between cables to support the claim that at least someone can reliably differenciate between two cables. 

 I point this out because it wouldn't be enough if you just brought him one cable first, then the other and he claimed "Wow they sound very different". Because in spite of his developed hearing abilities, just two exposures won't clear all doubts with respect to how misleading our own perception can be. The key is to make sure someone or some people can *reliably* identify differences between cables. That's why DBT would be required (apologies mods for mentioning this 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





)_

 

Ya, what you said! I didn't go into the thing about Ben Underwood because I thought it proved anything with respect to the great (yawn) cables debate, but instead to simply point out something about his hearing (and by extension our hearing) that most people are not aware of. Our ears are capable of making tremendous differentiations in sound much like our eyes are capable of seeing in an infinite array of colors. 

 This understanding of our eyes and ears doesn't necessarily mean that the world has more colors than simply black and white, but my perceptal cues tell me I can see more. I'm thinking the same might be true with respect to my ears and that I'm at least capable of hearing things just as well as Ben, in fact, demonstrably, does. These infinite shades of hearing that we might just be capable of, even if not at a fully conscious level, would thus _allow_ us to hear any differences that might be there (assuming that we haven't suffered any serious hearing damage which is another serious assumption for someone my age who has been an audio nut for so long). 

 But I agree, knowing that we might be able to hear what might be there, if it was there, doesn't tell us if in fact it is there. What I don't necessarily agree with is your acid test! I don't think, necessarily, that I'd need to see any scientific evidence that someone (Ben Underwood even) could reliably differentiate various cables in a double blind test (which would be kind of redundant in his case). Of course that sort of evidence would help to "prove" once and forever that the differences, themselves, existed. Yet at the same time, it is entirely possible that the differences do in fact exist but yet even the best among us cannot pass a test to prove it on a conscious level.

 Sounds like a bunch of nonsense? I agree, when looked at from the same angle we keeping looking at it from, what I've said above could be thought of as complete nonsense. But guess what! My eyes can maningfully distinguish infinite shades of color, such as that wonderful array of increasingly darker tones as you go from light to darkness when looking at a shadow that is cast right in front of you. You see it! No doubt about it. It's there. But could you describe, accurately, each and every shade from light to darkness? How many shades of grey can be seperately differentiated when you begin to describe what you are seeing, whether verbally or in writing? And what about the streak of sunlight that pierces through a crack in the wall to cast yet different sorts of shadows along the same wall that you're examining, and at the same time revealing yet another array of airbone dust particles that were there for you to see the whole time? You're seeing it now, aren't you? But what is even more exciting is that the "picture" that you're seeing is not static. It's ever changing. The millions of shades of grey that you were looking at 5 minutes ago are all slightly different now because the angle of the sun has changed, and in fact is always changing. 

 The beauty of it all is that we see all of this and don't "think" about it on a conscious level at all. It's just taken for granted. A deaf man sees more than we do because he needs to rely on his sense of sight more extensively to compensate for his inability to hear. Ben hears things that we don't? Or that we do but can't seperate in a meaningful way like he can? If our eyes are capable of distinguishing an infinite array of shades from total lightness to darkness, but yet we can't pass "double deaf tests" to "prove" that we in fact can see these things that we KNOW we can see (because we see them every day with our own two eyes), then why in the world can't people accept even the POSSIBILITY that our ears are capable of differentiating on this same level of magnitude? Just as our hands give us a similar such sense of touch and our tongue gives us a similar such sense of taste!

 No "double deaf test" is needed for me to know what I see, and even if I can't meaningfully describe, let alone differentiate, all of those shades of grey, I can see them! So can you, don't lie about it! I can hear all sorts of things as well, and my reaction to music isn't entirely on a conscious level. I might say, "Oh, I loved the bass in that song" but that's simply because I don't have the ability to describe the beauty of what I was hearing, and although I know it was a heck of a lot more complicated than that, those were the best words I could come up with on the spot to describe what I liked. Chances are is wasn't just the bass, and even if it was, it wasn't just the depth but it was the texture as well, and the resonances, and the decay, and the reverberations, and the interplay of all of this that I'm hearing at once, in a single moment, with everything else that is happening in the room around me, not to even mention the mids and highs and vocals.

 So what if the differences that I do indeed hear and can differentiate with my ears (just like the shades of grey with my eyes) but can't necessarily describe, let alone pass a "double blind test" on, are called "placebo" by others! They can placebo themselves to death all day long as far as I'm concerned because my reaction to music is on an emotional level and if some cables evoke more positive emotional responses that do others, then they're better. Better for me and my purposes because they allow me to hear more shades of grey just like my contact lenses help me to see more shades of grey. I could be wrong, but that's Ok, that won't make me sad. Using crappy cables when I know they're holding back my system, would, however, make me sad.

 In other words, it's complicated. Our hearing, that is. Same for our sight, touch and taste. Would I pay a bunch of money to slightly improve my sight? Nah. Not worth it to *me* in terms of the value proposition. Logic should dictate the same when it comes to sound, but thankfully I'm not Dr. Spock. That helps me to enjoy the music, by the way. People can try to make it simple, but it's not simple. If you can't accept that, then you will forever be lost in this infinite cables debate.


  Quote:


 PS. For the record, I'm neither a skeptic, nor a believer; I'm a bit of both. I think I hear differences between some cables, but I'm also quite too aware of how our brains and perception can play tricks on us. I have just suspended belief on this issue till further, more conclusive evidence is available. It wouldn't surprise me or shock me which side, whether cable believers or skeptics, were the ones eventually proved right. That would just let me checkmark one of the facts of life that I have in pending verification status. 
 

I agree with that too. Same place I'm at. I think cables make a slight difference. I think I can hear some of those differences. On an emotional level, I react differently to different cables, but I could be wrong about it and wouldn't be surprised if one day I were proved to be. But thankfully that doesn't bother me too much. As Neil Young would say, "I've been wrong before and I'll be there again, I don't have many answers, my friend. Just this pile of old questions my memory's left me here. In this field of opportunity it's plowing time again." In other words, you learn what you can learn from the experience and move on.

 Speaking of which, have you tried the Virtual Dymanics Master's series? Lovely sounding cables...


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Because electric current that flows from the outlet and source through the stock cables will be distorted and how can you expect lame carrier to bring out perfect sound? If you make an easy test by making the cheapest cable with female to male and see if it sounds different or not._

 

You've missed the point. 

 As I understand the position that you expressed in the earlier post, you claim that _all_ cables sound different from one another. Therefore, it should be possible to compare _any_ two cables and hear a difference. Yet, in your later post, you assert that in order to hear a difference, one needs to spend 10 to 20% of the cost of one's system on cables. These two assertions appear to be directly at odds with one another.

 Note that this has nothing to do with achieving "perfect sound." I am simply trying to reconcile your two seemingly conflicting statements regarding the circumstances under which you hear differences between cables.


----------



## Icarium

Sorry, even though I believe in cables. There is not 20 pages of proof here. There is a lot of semi-reasoned out speculation at best.


----------



## WindowsX

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You've missed the point. 

 As I understand the position that you expressed in the earlier post, you claim that all cables sound different from one another. Therefore, it should be possible to compare any two cables and hear a difference. Yet, in your later post, you assert that in order to hear a difference, one needs to spend 10 to 20% of the cost of one's system on cables. These two assertions appear to be directly at odds with one another.

 Note that this has nothing to do with achieving "perfect sound." I am simply trying to reconcile your two seemingly conflicting statements regarding the circumstances under which you hear differences between cables._

 

That should be my line. My explaination and speculations are for telling the difference between cables. For 10-20% additions is for folks who said the difference *is too little and not audible* but they indeed admitted there's difference but not worth to investigate for them. Please read those earlier posts again and try to find the connection why it ends up like this.

 To conclude it in short, it makes difference but 10-20% of system will make difference more pleasure and worth for investment.


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Open your mind and just try to replace stock cables with something more appropriate like 10-20% of your system for cost of each cable._

 

Equating sound quality with cost is completely absurd for most things, but for cables, it's particularly absurd. Even assuming there is a difference between cables (which there is no evidence to indicate) the cost of manufacture of even the most expensive doesn't add up to that much more than the least expensive. If cables made a difference, Chinese factories would be cranking out exact duplicates for a few bucks. Snake oil companies wouldn't be able to get away with selling wire for 50 to 100 times what it cost them to make. Cables just ain't rocket science.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Because electric current that flows from the outlet and source through the stock cables will be distorted and how can you expect lame carrier to bring out perfect sound?_

 

If the signal is distorted, that would be measurable.

 "Perfect sound" is another name for OCD.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## WindowsX

So what do you want to imply for? Just a waste of time and effort?


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_That should be my line. My explaination and speculations are for telling the difference between cables. For 10-20% additions is for folks who said the difference *is too little and not audible* but they indeed admitted there's difference but not worth to investigate for them. Please read those earlier posts again and try to find the connection why it ends up like this.

 To conclude it in short, it makes difference but 10-20% of system will make difference more pleasure and worth for investment._

 

Is it your position that there is a direct correlation between the cost of a cable and the quality of audio that cable is capable of producing?


----------



## Logistics

I believe he's pointing out that, although one cable will sound different from the next, a person may have to spend a large amount on cables before they would hear a significant difference or an audible difference. And I'm sure he's hoping you will gather that this example would consist of a situation in which the cables were the bottleneck.

 I, personally, have never seen any sort of real comparison between interconnects. If someone was going to compare a copper wire to a silver wire, for instance, then the termination, outer jackets, length, gauge; everything should be identical about the cable with the exception of the wire material used. And the cable had better not be tested on a piece of equipment that has jacks which are inferior to the plugs on the cable.


----------



## edstrelow

I wondered about the sonic effect of cables for a long time and finally did a fairly simple experiment to see if you could measure a different in frequency response. The answer was a modest yes!

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=155351

 I would not consider frequncy response the only chracteristic of sound that could be impacted, just that this was something I had the ability to measure.


----------



## kpeezy

GAH WindowsX is the king of all trolls. I'm moving on to new and exciting threads


----------



## WindowsX

Still no new posts for compromise thread...and yet troll keep asking for feeding...omg... As I said earlier from seeing http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=155351, not enough evidences or no we aren't sure about your explaination so make us understand, gahhhh.

http://www.rane.com/note110.html

 Well this is strong evidence and is there anyone willing to confirm or disprove it? Or you'll say it's marketing advertisement's prove for this time, ha?


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *kpeezy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_GAH WindowsX is the king of all trolls._

 

"Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by..."

 you know the rest of the quote.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## outmatch

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chat7* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_ahhh... just known why Thai's forum now is very calm..._

 

That made my day. XD


 Both Head-Fi's and Thai-Audiophile's community seem to agree on X's personality.


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_http://www.rane.com/note110.html

 Well this is strong evidence and is there anyone willing to confirm or disprove it? Or you'll say it's marketing advertisement's prove for this time, ha?_

 

Uh... there's nothing in there that says anything about boutique cables... silver vs. copper, skin effect, differences in sound quality, etc. It's about grounding and shielding, which applies the same to cheap cables as it does to expensive ones. Did you READ that article before you linked it, WindowsX?

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## WindowsX

Yes, I did. And I never say stuff like silver vs copper, skin effect, blablabla. What I said earlier is cables make difference and stuff like grounding, shielding should be in these concern as well. Did I miss anything here?

 Just to make sure, this thread started because of I couldn't stand all those ignorant accusions against patrick. Well, his attitude might be pretty weird for common people's sense but saying stuff like he's something not the same head-fi lover like us isn't what I think we can accept it. And now I seem to understand why Patrick acted like that and how it should be. Looks like the demoncracy is over here and music become something not art but science.

 Don't get me wrong that I want to say mine is the truth but what I believe in doesn't mean it won't be true if some people are against it. Farewell, cable forum, where believers fight against non-believer to protect the happiness of their belief.


----------



## Zorander

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Just to make sure, this thread started because of I couldn't stand all those ignorant accusions against patrick. Well, his attitude might be pretty weird for common people's sense but saying stuff like he's something not the same head-fi lover like us isn't what I think we can accept it. And now I seem to understand why Patrick acted like that and how it should be. Looks like the demoncracy is over here and music become something not art but science._

 

That issue was addressed a few pages back. Read them.


----------



## Fairbanks

Bigshot mentioned distortion.This is AQ's approach to power cords.Any truth in it. http://www.vanns.com/shop/servlet/it...ures/751033368


----------



## WindowsX

So shall we accept different thoughts as they're all satisfied answers? I don't think debating for one answer will suit everyone because of various factors that people have. My 10% different can be 1% or even 0.01% in another person's impressions so no point to make his 0.01% become 10% because that won't improve mine.


----------



## WindowsX

*Off-topic*

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *outmatch* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_That made my day. XD


 Both Head-Fi's and Thai-Audiophile's community seem to agree on X's personality. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

What the heck do you think you are talking about, Azure? You won't think that few absurd posts from some groups of people can be the standard of Thai-Audiophile's community's measurements, right? I have lost my faith in you a lot and it seems like your two face game is over now. There's only two group for kinds of people, development and ignorant... and I'm sure you'll do the worse if you're at my position.


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_There's only two group for kinds of people, development and ignorant... and I'm sure you'll do the worse if you're at my position._

 

It seems that all you know how to do is insult. It's clear that you can't engage in a meaningful discussion.


----------



## archosman

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_*Off-topic*



 What the heck do you think you are talking about, Azure? You won't think that few absurd posts from some groups of people can be the standard of Thai-Audiophile's community's measurements, right? I have lost my faith in you a lot and it seems like your two face game is over now. There's only two group for kinds of people, development and ignorant... and I'm sure you'll do the worse if you're at my position._

 



 Soooo... what's it like being superior to everyone else?


----------



## WindowsX

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_It seems that all you know how to do is insult. It's clear that you can't engage in a meaningful discussion._

 

It's off-topic to mr. outmatched so you don't need to consider anything un-related to the main discussion. And I'm done for the main discussion from few posts above.


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_And I'm done for the main discussion from few posts above._

 

And yet you're still posting.


----------



## WindowsX

Looks like feeding you isn't good idea. Congratulations, you are on my ignore list now.


----------



## LawnGnome

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Fairbanks* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Bigshot mentioned distortion.This is AQ's approach to power cords.Any truth in it. http://www.vanns.com/shop/servlet/it...ures/751033368_

 

The "hyper-litz" braid seems to be just a marketing term for twisted wires. Twisted wires is nothing new.

 The litz braid does have benefits for rejecting interference. But it does not have a real litz braid. From what I've read, twisted wires aren't nearly as effective. But are used because they are way more cost effective.

 As for their "RF stoppers" since they say they aren't actually connected to the cable, I am pretty sure they are ferrite cores. Which is nothing new, and you find them on tons of everyday cables for everything.

 You can even buy ferrite coils for a dollar or two and install them yourself.

 So just speaking on their claims, I'd say the product isn't worth it, since it is pretty much a regular cable, with some ferrites and a 150$ price tag, marketed with sneaky words to catch people who don't know this stuff.


----------



## fwojciec

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Yes, I did. And I never say stuff like silver vs copper, skin effect, blablabla. What I said earlier is cables make difference and stuff like grounding, shielding should be in these concern as well. Did I miss anything here?

 Just to make sure, this thread started because of I couldn't stand all those ignorant accusions against patrick. Well, his attitude might be pretty weird for common people's sense but saying stuff like he's something not the same head-fi lover like us isn't what I think we can accept it. And now I seem to understand why Patrick acted like that and how it should be. Looks like the demoncracy is over here and music become something not art but science.

 Don't get me wrong that I want to say mine is the truth but what I believe in doesn't mean it won't be true if some people are against it. Farewell, cable forum, where believers fight against non-believer to protect the happiness of their belief._

 

Look, there is absolutely nothing personal, at least on my part, as far as this whole cable problem we have been discussing in this thread is concerned. In my opinion everyone can believe what they like - as long as they don't hurt other people as the result of their beliefs.

 But you have to understand that posting OMG stories about improvements due to boutique cables (expressions of what you call "the happiness of [your] belief") - improvements that are detectable only subjectively, and thus unreliably, is neither harmless nor will it go unnoticed and unchallenged.

 Some people post in this forum, many more come to read and inform themselves before spending their money, and we all know that unchecked enthusiasm can easily spiral out to orgiastic proportions and become highly contagious. We have a responsibility as posting members of this forum, and those of us who take their time to keep it real here are doing a public service of sorts.

 If you don't want these kinds of intrusions don't post about these things in public... and if you do - learn to deal with criticism and to defend your opinions, that's all.


----------



## LawnGnome

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Looks like feeding you isn't good idea. Congratulations, you are on my ignore list now._

 

Why do you say that like it is supposed to hurt them?

 All you are doing is blocking out all opinions that contradict and challenge your own. 

 There is names for people like that...


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Looks like feeding you isn't good idea. Congratulations, you are on my ignore list now._

 

Haha! Well, you were ignoring my questions anyway, so you'll have to forgive me if I don't get too upset over this development.


----------



## Akathisia

Hey thread crappers, you should learn to follow your friend's advice.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *LawnGnome* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I see you think it is a nice night to go for a s*troll* in the park._


----------



## LawnGnome

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Akathisia* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Hey thread crappers, you should learn to follow your friend's advice._

 

Kinda like what you are doing, by bringing up old locked threads. Hmmmm?


----------



## Zorander

Go back to talking about cables, guys, or risk getting this thread locked!


----------



## luckypictures

24 pages of comments, since the 21st!?!?!?!


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Zorander* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Go back to talking about cables, guys, or risk getting this thread locked!_

 

I would like to do so. This is the last question that I asked of WindowsX:

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Is it your position that there is a direct correlation between the cost of a cable and the quality of audio that cable is capable of producing?_

 

I think that's a pretty reasonable question, and I had a very specific purpose in asking it. If it is true that price of a cable is directly correlated to the quality of the audio that the cable is producing, which WindowsX's prior statement seemed to suggest and which others (such as Tourmaline) have argued previously, then it would be impossible to get "perfect sound" (to use WindowsX's phrase) without an infinitely expensive cable. My suspicion is that WindowsX would not agree that it is necessary to have an infinitely expensive cable to get "perfect sound," in which case he would presumably concede that there exists a point at which buying a more expensive cable does not yield any better results. Any cable that is priced beyond that point, therefore, would be nothing but snake oil.

 I certainly don't expect that WindowsX would agree with me on exactly where that point falls, but I was hoping that we could, through discussion of this point, attempt to reach some common ground that could be the subject of further productive discussion. Instead, he responded with this:

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Still no new posts for compromise thread...and yet troll keep asking for feeding...omg..._


----------



## Fairbanks

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *LawnGnome* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The "hyper-litz" braid seems to be just a marketing term for twisted wires. Twisted wires is nothing new.

 The litz braid does have benefits for rejecting interference. But it does not have a real litz braid. From what I've read, twisted wires aren't nearly as effective. But are used because they are way more cost effective.

 As for their "RF stoppers" since they say they aren't actually connected to the cable, I am pretty sure they are ferrite cores. Which is nothing new, and you find them on tons of everyday cables for everything.

 You can even buy ferrite coils for a dollar or two and install them yourself.

 So just speaking on their claims, I'd say the product isn't worth it, since it is pretty much a regular cable, with some ferrites and a 150$ price tag, marketed with sneaky words to catch people who don't know this stuff._

 

I was refering to the paragraph on damage control.Is the theory plausible.


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Yes, I did. And I never say stuff like silver vs copper, skin effect, blablabla. What I said earlier is cables make difference and stuff like grounding, shielding should be in these concern as well. Did I miss anything here?_

 

Yes. The principles in that article are the *exact* same principles used to create *any* cable on the market, regardless of price. Nothing in that article indicates that boutique cables sound better, or even that cables can sound different from each other. All it talks about is how to avoid ground loop hum in the long runs used in PA systems.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Looks like the demoncracy is over here and music become something not art but science._

 

If I'm interpreting your spelling and grammar errors correctly...

 Sound reproduction is not an art. Hearing is not an art. They're more involved with science. Creating music is an art, and listening and understanding can be an art. Cables have nothing at all to do with that.

 And this discussion is perfectly democratic. You have just as much opportunity to make your point as anyone else. Whether you do or not depends on you.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_So shall we accept different thoughts as they're all satisfied answers? I don't think debating for one answer will suit everyone because of various factors that people have._

 

All opinions are not created equal. Some are based on knowledge and are backed up with facts, and others are based on ignorance and heresay. If you want your opinions to hold weight with other people, defend them and make sure you know what you're talking about.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Fairbanks* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I was refering to the paragraph on damage control.Is the theory plausible._

 

You mean the part with all those tiny little signals "fighting to get back to the outside again"? It says that the design of a power cord can cause data loss, distortion and poor sound quality. How can it do that *when the signal isn't passing through the power cord?* A power cord conducts the power to run an amp or CD player. Just about any power cord in good shape does that perfectly well. If you live next to a radio station transmitter, or if you have ground loop problems, the cord could conceivably bring noise into your system. But shielding and grounding either ARE a problem, or they AREN'T. And solving those problems sure doesn't require a $150 power cable.

 That's the long answer to your question. The short answer is that the cutesy copy on the page you linked is blatantly obvious sales pitch written by someone who doesn't even believe what he's writing himself. Can't you see that just by reading it?

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## Fairbanks

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You mean the part with all those tiny little signals "fighting to get back to the outside again"? It says that the design of a power cord can cause data loss, distortion and poor sound quality. How can it do that *when the signal isn't passing through the power cord?* A power cord conducts the power to run an amp or CD player. Just about any power cord in good shape does that perfectly well. If you live next to a radio station transmitter, or if you have ground loop problems, the cord could conceivably bring noise into your system. But shielding and grounding either ARE a problem, or they AREN'T. And solving those problems sure doesn't require a $150 power cable.

 That's the long answer to your question. The short answer is that the cutesy copy on the page you linked is blatantly obvious sales pitch written by someone who doesn't even believe what he's writing himself. Can't you see that just by reading it?

 See ya
 Steve_

 

Ok,I think I'll make my exit now,thanks.


----------



## Logistics

Anyone who invested money in companies who manufacture blood-pressure medication before this thread started must be making a KILLING!


----------



## papomaster

By looking at the last 15 pages or so, the discussion has been mostly crap and partly "my weenie is bigger than yours" (<- refers to the "I own costly cables and you don't" crap). This thread is not about discussing if you ever heard a 10k cable and you've heard the difference or not. This tread was intended to discuss about the OP's thought : he thinks we badly behaviour towards Patrick82 and his actions. If you read his opening tread carefully, he never intended to talk about cables, tweaks or anything related to audio.

 Now that I've attempted to clear some **** out, I can attempt to answer the OP's questionning :

 Some of the trash about Patrick82 is not legitimate at all. Some people try to neglect him for wrong reasons and try to humiliate him by laughing at the way he treats his hobby. I believe this is plain ********, as Patrick : 1) has had the opportunity to make choices about the way he considers his hobby, 2) made a choice on his own, and most important 3) assumes the consequences of his choices (time consuming hobby, costly material). If he's happy with his choices (and that's the impression I may get from reading his posts throughout the years) and they don't offend or harm anyone, then where's the problem? These are HIS choices, not yours. Also, you can't say someone's perception of a subjective effect is wrong. If he's hearing some differences on his setup by wearing a different hat, then how can you say it's not true? He probably heard them. That doesn't mean YOU would hear the differences, just that for his ears, it makes some.

 However, I think that some of the negative speech about Patrick82 may be on a right basis. The way he explains, support, and discuss about his hobby might be inappropriate on this forum. As I said earlier, he may have heard some differences by putting a different hat, but the affirmation in which it would _definately, and undoubtedly_ make a difference for anyone is far less defendable as a fact. If he had made someone else listen to his own to try hearing the differences the tweaks he makes, that would be of another manner though. What some people (the most serious ones) criticize about Patrick82's comments is not the lack of scientific bases about his tweaks but more the way he defends them. He may say that, for him, on his setup, brilliant pebbles make a difference. He may even try to say the quantitative differences it made _FOR HIM_. But saying that "brilliant pebbles will make a big difference in your system" is something that could be proven wrong for most people. It's also his persistance of inconsistencies in his comments that make some people think badly of his opinions and perceptions. Lastly on this subject, the double-blind cables test and the discussion surrounding it made some people doubt Patrick82's affirmations.

 Another thing people complain about Patrick82's tweaks is the sometimes dangerous environment he puts himself into. Removing the shielding, unsolder and solder stuff, leaving bare wires around you while you work is absolutely not recommended and people could get hurt by trying to attempt some of the tweaks Patrick82 does.

 Finally, some people think Patrick82 may have a bad influence on some peoples when time comes to improve their systems, as Patrick82's tweaks may not give any audible effects to the majority of people. If someone looks at Patrick82's posts and says to himself, "Hey, this guy thinks that putting a 10kg rock on my CDP will greatly improve the bass. How many posts and for how long has he been here? Hmmmm... Lets see... 4 years! More than 2000 posts! I gotta believe him", he might buy a 150$ rock and lose a chunk of money.

 Just my 2 canadian cents (now that it's worth 2 us cents 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




)


----------



## gotchaforce

Has anyone linked to patricks hilarious myspace where he talks about how he pissed on kids in P.E. and such

 patrick has a great way of telling incredibly weird stories that are funny.

 i just went to his myspace and found this video.

 sure its creepy but its also definitely on a different level of humor that i find funny as hell.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97-9vHfvREk


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Speaking of which, have you tried the Virtual Dymanics Master's series? Lovely sounding cables..._

 

I haven´t had the chance yet Wayne, but will keep this in mind.


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *fwojciec* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Some people post in this forum, many more come to read and inform themselves before spending their money, and we all know that unchecked enthusiasm can easily spiral out to orgiastic proportions and become highly contagious. *We have a responsibility as posting members of this forum, and those of us who take their time to keep it real here are doing a public service of sorts.*

 If you don't want these kinds of intrusions don't post about these things in public... and if you do - learn to deal with criticism and to defend your opinions, that's all._

 


 Congratulations on such an excellent post Fwojciec! The importance of that responsibility you mention can't be stressed enough. 

 If only more people had this healthy and much needed commitment towards rationality, critical thinking, and ultimately truth, in service of the communities we are part of.


----------



## WindowsX

But it's reader's decision to support or negate it. You don't have responsibility to think in place of reader. From above post, we can infer that the community can decide patrick's tweaks is right or wrong for all community? Trust me there're people who do tweaks like Patrick and much more seriously than him and seems like a lot of them do it regularly for their high-end system. But reader can decide to do that or not for their system. Stop treating readers like fools, please.


----------



## LawnGnome

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_But it's reader's decision to support or negate it. You don't have responsibility to think in place of reader. From above post, we can infer that the community can decide patrick's tweaks is right or wrong for all community? Trust me there're people who do tweaks like Patrick and much more seriously than him and seems like a lot of them do it regularly for their high-end system. But reader can decide to do that or not for their system. *Stop treating readers like fools, please.*_

 

You continue on with your posts that make little sense.

 Who the heck are you even talking about in the bolded part?


----------



## WindowsX

As I told you in previous post, readers have brain so don't judge whatever you like for them as if it's your responsibility. It's totally unneccessary for self-justification.

 Regards.


----------



## monolith

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Fairbanks* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Ok,I think I'll make my exit now,thanks._

 

I'm actually pretty curious about why that reply made you want to exit the thread. It was a little condescending, but he made no unassailable claims.

 Of course, this is under the assumption that saying you'll make your exit means you'll just stop replying, which is usually the case, but I might be wrong.


----------



## gritzcolin

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I agree; it's his hobby, his money and his opinion, like anybody else's opinion!

 Nobody would attack anybody for buying an expensive exotic car costing 500.000 dollars, but if somebody is buying any decent cabling, he is called any name possible! This still seems not accepted!

 Alot of you people out there could learn something from him; alot of things concur with what i found out after extensive experimenting and listening to Cables, IC's etc.

 Instead of reading sites and blab as they do, try and experiment for yourself and you'll know! A piece of wire doesn't have to cost much, so these experiments wouldn't cost you an arm and a legg, but will give you some insites._

 

 Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Believe me, in some cases, as in mine, it is really like night and day! As much improvement as good or high end components would give!

 The only problem is, in the audio industry they can ask what they think is right for the quality they are selling.

 On a rig of 50.000 or 100.000 dollars, 10.000 for cabling isn't insane, as a matter affect more a necessaty to make the rig perform it should!

 In 25 years, i've never seen or heard any high end rig being cabled with radio shack cables, only with high end cables, so there must be a reason for it, and know very well why for sure. As some other people do that experiment and listen to all sorts of cables._

 

 Quote:


  Originally Posted by *fwojciec* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Yes, I agree, they are an unruly bunch. Since, apparently, imperatives are not cutting it anymore, I say just get yourself a whip and whip them into submission! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			



_

 



 C-C-C-COMBO BREAKER!!! 

 I believe in nice cables for sure but I think once you get to a certain point build quality is all your really get improvements upon. This is even more apparent when you use digital cables. Fancy cables only give you improvements on build quality and basic materials, there has to be some kind of cutoff to be found but it never will as some peoples ears won't allow them to believe differently even if scientific data says otherwise. Buy your cables I am gonna use that money to buy some crack....I mean headphones yeah headphones.


----------



## outmatch

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_*Off-topic*



 What the heck do you think you are talking about, Azure? You won't think that few absurd posts from some groups of people can be the standard of Thai-Audiophile's community's measurements, right? I have lost my faith in you a lot and it seems like your two face game is over now. There's only two group for kinds of people, development and ignorant... and I'm sure you'll do the worse if you're at my position._

 

Nope, actually I do not pick any side. And I also believe in cables.

 I believe in individualism. Anyone can do anything he or she pleases, as long as they do not involve other's rights. You are fine to believe in cables, as much as you want to, I do respect your opinion. But please, do not flame someone who cannot hear the difference between cables or say that cables are placebos. They have the right to have their own opinions. I agree that some of them on TAF seem to have bias toward you, but your choice of wording sometimes can appear improper and offending. That is what I mean by "agree on your personality". I do not know if you intend to express your superiority over others or what, if you are, then I have nothing more to say. But if you are not, please know that your style of storytelling is not appreciated by some, and please understand that I have no bias toward you, as we have not met each other even once, all that I say here is out of my goodwill. If my post offend you then I apologize and will retract those statements. Actually I posted that light-heartedly, meant as a joke, and did not mean any harm.

 Best,
 Azure of TAF


----------



## mbriant

Quote:


 If I'm interpreting your spelling and grammar errors correctly... 
 

 Quote:


 You continue on with your posts that make little sense. 
 

Please remember that English is not everyone's first language .... and do not make personal attacks or sarcastic/snide comments.

  Quote:


 you'll see why I posted it just because some fools who want to say cable is stupid. 
 

 But at the same time, even if your first language isn't English, that's not reason to start name-calling.


----------



## WindowsX

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *outmatch* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Nope, actually I do not pick any side. And I also believe in cables.

 I believe in individualism. Anyone can do anything he or she pleases, as long as they do not involve other's rights. You are fine to believe in cables, as much as you want to, I do respect your opinion. But please, do not flame someone who cannot hear the difference between cables or say that cables are placebos. They have the right to have their own opinions. I agree that some of them on TAF seem to have bias toward you, but your choice of wording sometimes can appear improper and offending. That is what I mean by "agree on your personality". I do not know if you intend to express your superiority over others or what, if you are, then I have nothing more to say. But if you are not, please know that your style of storytelling is not appreciated by some, and please understand that I have no bias toward you, as we have not met each other even once, all that I say here is out of my goodwill. If my post offend you then I apologize and will retract those statements. Actually I posted that light-heartedly, meant as a joke, and did not mean any harm.

 Best,
 Azure of TAF_

 

But it seems your understanding came from ones who's biased from what I saw in your post. Go back to TAF and read carefully about my first post and early replies. I never say anything against replys that are in main topics but be more supportive about member's opinions but some franks tried to dig up old stories or come up with another story which is un-related to the topic and messed everything up. I'm so tired and sick of people who have been messing around in TAF and decided to leave for once in a while.

 Regards,
 Windows X


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *outmatch* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I do respect your opinion. But please, do not flame someone who cannot hear the difference between cables or say that cables are placebos._

 

"Placebo" is not an insult. It affects cable non-believers as well as believers. It's part of being human. We have a logical thought process to figure out whether we are actually hearing something or if it's a misperception. That is a vital part of any discussion involving sensory perception. "Magical thinking" is how we justify and explain our misperceptions. THAT'S where faulty logic enters the picture.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## Sovkiller

OK this discussion was opened to express the disagreement about some members behavior against Patrick. This point was already discussed and IMO dead long time ago, OTOH this is becoming a believers versus non believers discussion. 

 Moderators, is there any particular interest in keeping this thread open, I mean we have enough of those threads already here....a bunch of pages of redundant discussion, with *nothing new* to offer, that is a waste of web space and resources....


----------



## WindowsX

indeed.


----------



## fwojciec

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_OK this discussion was opened to express the disagreement about some members behavior against Patrick. This point was already discussed and IMO dead long time ago, OTOH this is becoming a believers versus non believers discussion. 

 Moderators, is there any particular interest in keeping this thread open, I mean we have enough of those threads already here....a bunch of pages of redundant discussion, with *nothing new* to offer, that is a waste of web space and resources....
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

If/when this thread is closed another, similar one will be started shortly, so what's the supposed benefit of closing it? It's not like you are going to eliminate believer/non-believer debate that way. In some ways mega-threads are better means of managing recurring discussions than keeping hundreds or prematurely closed discussions around - the latter solution only litters the results of search queries. But then this is something that mods need to decide, of course.


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *fwojciec* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_If/when this thread is closed another, similar one will be started shortly, so what's the supposed benefit of closing it? It's not like you are going to eliminate believer/non-believer debate that way. In some ways mega-threads are better means of managing recurring discussions than keeping hundreds or prematurely closed discussions around - the latter solution only litters the results of search queries. But then this is something that mods need to decide, of course._

 

And then it will be closed as well, if no new info is offered...*we need new info and new evidences*, until then, it makes no sense to keep on debating on a subject that you can not prove the other wrong. And I think that people need to learn how to respect others opinions *if they do not have anything to offer to refute them*...and please stop playing golden ears, as many of them are not, and if you let me, I could prove that in heartbeat with a DBT here home...you will be surprised of how many, and which of them fail miserably using any setup, even their own setups, just let me work with them and you will see...and the more respectable, the better candidates...


----------



## WindowsX

*we need new info and new evidences*

 and it seems what they've been offered so far couldn't satisfy any of you. If I shall classify, here's the deal

 believer: ones who tried and successfully archived the knowledge of tweaking cables.
 non-believer: 10% are people who tried and failed to archive the knowledge of tweaking cables. The rest?

 I guess this case resembles something.....hmmm.....my friend "To" told me that my sennheiser hd595 just gives louder sound. There's no way he will pay like $500 just for louder music. If we apply the rules from cable forum in head-fi, he's right. We are wrong to begin with telling difference that he couldn't understand it. We can't supply supportive evidence to convince him. Let's throw away our rigs and use stock ibuds for the best.

 Ha? That seems to work well, doesn't it? Hey hey hey... I ain't telling ya cables do difference but if not, here's what it shall happen to non head-fiers.


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_*we need new info and new evidences*

 and it seems what they've been offered so far couldn't satisfy any of you._

 

Sorry to disapoint you, and of course that they can not satisfy any of us, as till now I have not seen any real new evidence, and not only here, in any place I know off, other than the ones we know from 25 years ago, that does not prove a **** about differences in cables...I will not go into that argument again, honestly I'm pretty sick of trying to see the ligh with no other objective answer other than I hear this and that...

 Also you are considering in your answer, in the non-beleiver section, that the differences exist, and are real for sure, and that the rest have not been able to ear or to get them, what this is indeed what we are asking to be proved in the first instance, a little selfish if you ask me, right?


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_if you let me, I could prove that in heartbeat with a DBT here home...you will be surprised of how many, and which of them fail miserably using any setup, even their own setups, just let me work with them and you will see..._

 

Something that might be useful to include in these threads would be to describe in detail how to properly carry out a DBT, in particular for cable comparison. This would include specifying all factors involved in the testing procedure: how many samples to do per subject, how to cover the cables (neither subject nor assistant should know what cable is being tested in each trial), how to register the data and results, and how to do the calculations afterwards, to conclude whether the results can be explained by chance vs. by other means. Now that I think about it, might be worth having a dedicated thread for this, to collect suggestions etc.


----------



## fwojciec

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_*we need new info and new evidences*

 and it seems what they've been offered so far couldn't satisfy any of you. If I shall classify, here's the deal

 believer: ones who tried and successfully archived the knowledge of tweaking cables.
 non-believer: 10% are people who tried and failed to archive the knowledge of tweaking cables. The rest?

 I guess this case resembles something.....hmmm.....my friend "To" told me that my sennheiser hd595 just gives louder sound. There's no way he will pay like $500 just for louder music. If we apply the rules from cable forum in head-fi, he's right. We are wrong to begin with telling difference that he couldn't understand it. We can't supply supportive evidence to convince him. Let's throw away our rigs and use stock ibuds for the best.

 Ha? That seems to work well, doesn't it? Hey hey hey... I ain't telling ya cables do difference but if not, here's what it shall happen to non head-fiers._

 

By continuing to claim that the problem of differences between cables is analogous to the problem of the differences between headphones you are actually benefiting the cause of non-believers more than the most outspoken skeptics here... Just like Patrick82, the master parodist himself, who, by associating his outrageous claims and himself with the believers, devastates their credibility and makes their claims fundamentally suspicious to any reasonable person out there.

 It is because of you two, in particular, that we're experiencing such a vehement outpouring of the skeptical sentiment on this forum at the moment - so thanks, and keep up the good work


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Something that might be useful to include in these threads would be to describe in detail how to properly carry out a DBT, in particular for cable comparison. This would include specifying all factors involved in the testing procedure: how many samples to do per subject, how to cover the cables (neither subject nor assistant should know what cable is being tested in each trial), how to register the data and results, and how to do the calculations afterwards, to conclude whether the results can be explained by chance vs. by other means. Now that I think about it, might be worth having a dedicated thread for this, to collect suggestions etc._

 

A double blind test is nothing fancy to be implemented correectly, it is just swapping cables while using know devices, and known material...

 But thinking this way, trying to make a DBT, a test from outer space and "very hard to achieve" properly (while indeed it is not) the beleivers will always discart any test that could possibly prove them right or wrong.

 Of course they do not need it, as they are convinced of the results, but we do, to find out and try to get the light, also add the fact that if the participants do not hear the differences that doesn't mean that the differences do not exist for others and that is a long list of requirements, or IMO excuses to rule out methodologies that will only try to prove one side or the other...


----------



## Chu

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Something that might be useful to include in these threads would be to describe in detail how to properly carry out a DBT, in particular for cable comparison. This would include specifying all factors involved in the testing procedure: how many samples to do per subject, how to cover the cables (neither subject nor assistant should know what cable is being tested in each trial), how to register the data and results, and how to do the calculations afterwards, to conclude whether the results can be explained by chance vs. by other means. Now that I think about it, might be worth having a dedicated thread for this, to collect suggestions etc._

 

I've suggested before:

 1. Build 3 identical systems. Then swap one with a set of boutique cables by an outside observer, and have them obfuscate the systems. 

 2. Challenge people to find the different one.

 3. Publish the results. Leave analysis to others.

 The systems have to be built very carefully. If it was my money, I would go for:

 1. Computer source /w digital output. We can generate three identical bitstreams fairly trivially and completely take the source of the of the picture. It would also let people choose their music.

 2. For the headphones, I would suggest either the K701 or HD580. They are both fairly "cheap" headphones that many people who espouse the benefits of cables actually have in their systems. I choose the HD580 over the HD650 because if $1K is the ceiling it does not make sense to go for the HD650 since it really is a different beast and the 580/600 has a legion following.

 3. For the default cables, I would go for BJC. Noone in the skeptic community would question this choice. For power cables probably Iron Lung Jellyfish.

 4. For the test cable, really, someone who isn't in the skeptic community would be better off making this choice, since to those in the other camp they're really all the same.

 5. The amp + dac. This is where it gets tricky. I personally love the G-Lite as the price point its at, but for this test we really should avoid hand built amps because of the margin it introduces for expiremental error. We have about $600 to play with, and I am just not familiar enough with Solid-state amps and dacs to make a wise choice here.

 This test could be done someplace like the international meet to get as many people able to listen as possible. The total cost of the test would be about $600 i.e. $3000 up front and selling the parts off for 80% value afterwards.

 I would love to see someone who has a ton of cash laying around try something like this. If I ever win the lottery or get to a point in my life where $600 is chump change I'd probably do it myself (if the community would let me).


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_A double blind test is nothing fancy to be implemented correectly,_

 

It is nothing fancy or out of this world difficult, but it is certainly not trivial to carry it out correctly.

 For example, a double blind test to compare headphone cables I think would be quite more troublesome than a DBT for interconnects. For one thing, to rule out the possible variability between headphones of the same model and type, we should use one same headphone (at least one same headphone for all auditions of one subject). Hence we would need to switch the cables on those same headphones whenever there's a cable swap required. This causes a problem for the DBT, because unless the connectors and plug look exactly the same on both cables, even wrapping the cables with some sleeve (so that they can't be visually distinguished), still it will be pretty easy at least for the assistant to identify which cable is which when plugging them into the headphones and/or the amplifier.

 The weight of the cable might be different as well, or how stiff the cable is, and those factors might help the subject identify which cable is which, even with eyes closed, and before listening to them, just by moving slightly the headphones on your head and feeling how stiff/loose the attachment to the headphones feels. Or for the assistant, just by holding the cable when plugging them into the amp, or plugging the connectors to the headphone, he might tell what cable it is, even though the plugs and connectors are the same and the cable is covered. Just because of its weight and/or stiffness.

 All of those trivialities introduce significant difficulties in designing a good DBT for headphone cables.

 Also, things like who decides the exact random sequence of cables, how many trials, how long each song or music sample to play. What forms to use to record the subjects assessment of each cable. And in fact, even how would the subject assess the comparison? One absolute sound quality score for each audition (e.g. a score between 0 and 4?) or one relative score with respect to the previous audition, e.g. three categories "0) Same cable", "1) Different cable and better", "-1) Different cable and worse".

 All of those details are choices to be made in designing the DBT, and they have to be carefully thought out to make a good DBT, satisfactory for all parties involved, testers and testees, and the interested community in general.


----------



## WindowsX

1. go to hi-fi shop with your amp and source in there (you can even use portable cd player or imod to satisfy cable testing)
 2. ask shop for borrowing cables and try exchanging them with your prepared rig.

 that's the finest solution to find if it will ever tell you the difference. If you want decisive prove, tell me how water tastes like in term of wording not actual drinking and make me feel like i actually drink it. You absolutely can't do that, can you?

 Stop being persistant, blockhead and stubborn, please. You will never find the truth if you never open the door and wait for signal from outside without seeing it for yourself. You can feel how being on top of Everest is like from listening, you can't see actual shark just from pictures, you can feel the cloud from looking the aeroplane. And is there anybody asking for stubborn stuff like these? jeez...


----------



## tot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_For example, a double blind test to compare headphone cables I think would be quite more troublesome than a DBT for interconnects. For one thing, to rule out the possible variability between headphones of the same model and type, we should use one same headphone (at least one same headphone for all auditions of one subject)._

 

Wouldn't multiple headphones work if the headphones are rotated to different cables so that each headphone/cable combination gets equal share?


----------



## Sovkiller

I would begin with the more obvious one, maybe a paper clip versus a $3000.00 cable, if the test fail, then we could move one gradually to a better and better cable, leaving at least one end covered wit the $3000.00 cable, we could use a source with multiple outputs and use a multiple input amp, same heapdhones and cable, just switching sources in the amp will be pretty easy, ten times each in random access, with data previously recorded, in each case listener must identify the cable they are using...

 Oh wait!!! Then, the cable must be burned in for 400 hours, in the direction they want them to be, and test them after, OMG the test would last for 10 years then!!!!


----------



## Chu

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_ If you want decisive prove, tell me how water tastes like in term of wording not actual drinking and make me feel like i actually drink it. You absolutely can't do that, can you?_

 

Actually . . .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfPAjUvvnIc


----------



## tot

I have noticed quite a few times people refer paper clips as a reference "bad" cable, maybe because it is not really a cable. Is there any reason to believe that it is bad, it just could be a killer cable that nobody has ever seriously though (I am not meaning this as a joke). Solid core, air insulated.


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_1. go to hi-fi shop with your amp and source in there (you can even use portable cd player or imod to satisfy cable testing)
 2. ask shop for borrowing cables and try exchanging them with your prepared rig.

 that's the finest solution to find if it will ever tell you the difference._

 

No it isn't, if you cared about what the DBT methodology (precisely) tries to factor out; things like:

 - Communal reinforcement
 - Confirmation bias
 - Placebo effect
 - Selective thinking
 - Self-deception
 - Subjective validation
 - Wishful thinking

 Some helpful links:
*http://skepdic.com/control.html*
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-blind
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-double-blind-test.htm

 In particular, the link in bolds has a very nice read on an application of DBT to find out whether a particular device was capable of detecting human heart beats at 20 meters through any material, as the manufacturing company claimed it had. There's also another example assessing a dowser's skill.


----------



## Akathisia

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I have noticed quite a few times people refer paper clips as a reference "bad" cable, maybe because it is not really a cable. Is there any reason to believe that it is bad, it just could be a killer cable that nobody has ever seriously though (I am not meaning this as a joke). Solid core, air insulated._

 

SHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!! Don't let my secret out!


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Wouldn't multiple headphones work if the headphones are rotated to different cables so that each headphone/cable combination gets equal share?_

 

Using different headphones would introduce a major cause of possible sonic differences: a different transducer.

 In order to pinpoint the actual difference cables could make, I think it would be mandatory that the whole rest of the audio chain remains exactly the same; only the cables would be swapped.


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Stop being persistant, blockhead and stubborn, please. You will never find the truth if you never open the door and wait for signal from outside without seeing it for yourself. You can feel how being on top of Everest is like from listening, you can't see actual shark just from pictures, you can feel the cloud from looking the aeroplane. And is there anybody asking for stubborn stuff like these? jeez..._

 

Excuse me, but are you talking to me? 

 So do you really believe that you are the only one with ears good enough that can decide, and prove that different cables sounded different, and that we are all crazy, and even called us stubborn, without even knowing if we are really skeptics, or how many cables we have tried, or if we just want, as any other normal person in this world to be enlighten with logical and physical evidence, *that nobody had offered*, not even you, in a topic completely and absolutely under the extend of our knowledge, to be discussed and proved or not. That is not to be an skeptic, nor stubborn, it is just to be a logical normal person, I consider that the ones who insist in believe in a thing they can not prove, just because they believe they ear it, are the stubborns, and not us...
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 So are you calling stubborn, a person, just because he requested from other members, to prove them wrong, *with logical physical evidence* that even while it is completely and fully obtainable, they do refuse to even try to get, (maybe for the fear of being publicly ridiculed) and OTOH insisted in keep on with that same stupid and absurd argument of the "I hear this and that" yada yada, while millions does not. Sorry but you must be crazy man...!!!

 Guys if there is no new evidence to show, and I'm 100% sure that there is none, otherwise this discussion will end 20 year ago, please mods close this stupid thread!!! It is not even on topic anymore...


----------



## WindowsX

The real issue is some people said it before "Yes. A does B" but then some groups said "No. Never" and try to disprove A. I switched power cables for countless time and I can tell which cable gives that sound signature without seeing the actual cables I have. My experiences are true and there're plenty of proves in the magazine which can't be found easily in the internet (bahh.... i mean ones ppl who are non-believer will never believe lol)


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I would begin with the more obvious one, maybe a paper clip versus a $3000.00 cable_

 

I wouldn't actually.

 If anyone had a pair of cables he was familiar with and claimed to be able to distinguish, then that person would go under the test in order to verify whether he can indeed distinguish those two specific cables. In fact, if the person brought their own rig (e.g. source, amp, headphones, power filters) then that should be the rig to use in his test.

 Also, as in the example of the device in the bold link, the person should first go through a phase in which the test is not blind, so that the person can verify the audible conditions, and the rig under test, allowing him to distinguish the cables as easily as they can be usually distinguishable by him outside of testing conditions.

 Only then, after his approval and admission of everything sounding ok, then the cables would be wrapped properly, and the double blind test would begin, so that neither assistant nor subject could tell which cable is which during the test, either by looking at them, touching them, or indirectly feeling them through the headphones or the sleeve wrapping them while connecting them to amp or headphones.

 The idea, in my opinion, would not be to gather statistics on whether a sufficient percentage of people can distinguish $$$$$ cable from paper clip wire. The idea is to verify a particular claim by particular individuals, about distinguishing specific cables they are (hopefully) very familiar with.

 If out of 100 or 1000 people, only one could reliably tell two cables apart, then that's the only subject we are looking for to "prove" that some people can indeed reliably distinguish different sounds from different cables, or in other words, to prove that cables can sound audibly different, at least to some people.

 I would also suggest that the R, L, and C specifications of all cables used in the tests must be properly measured for further analysis of correlations (or lack of) with the results.


----------



## Vul Kuolun

Generating different soundfiles via:

 CDP-->cable to be tested-->high-quality soundcard-->.wav 

 would be a very convenient and flexible way. 
 You could send the files over the net, and let the believers listen and deceide at home, with their equipment.

 The fact that no manufacturer does this (despite one company -sorry, forgot the name- which offeredtotally differnt files, differing in dynamic range) tells us one thing:
 The magnitude of the changes to be expected is so small, that the benefit gets lost in a single a/d-conversion.

 So now, we have some kind of maximum limit of the phenomenon. Quite helping, isn't it?


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The real issue is some people said it before "Yes. A does B" but then some groups said "No. Never" and try to disprove A. I switched power cables for countless time and I can tell which cable gives that sound signature without seeing the actual cables I have. My experiences are true and there're plenty of proves in the magazine which can't be found easily in the internet (bahh....I mean ones ppl who are non-believer will never believe lol)_

 

The problem with those articles that you said that show the claimed differences (and that indeed most of the times, only said they hear them with no prove of any kind) is that they can be only found in audio magazines, and most of the times with no scientific base at all. And we all know that all these magazines, are also paid by the adds that those same cable manufacturers post in their pages, though they are a little dubious, IMO.

 BTW I have heard some of the equipment reviewed in those good magazines, expecting to hear what they said, and honestly, my experience have been so far from the reality they claim. Even more, some of the amps I know by heart, have been reviewed by them, showing a completely different scenario of what they indeed are, to my ears, in other words I consider reviews and articles in magazines, very subjective opinions as well... 

 OTOH I do not know of any of those articles, that even try to prove the differences of different aftermarket expensive cables, that have been published in any EE text book, or good book that could be used for instruction in any EE course, in any university or college, so till then, to me they are not evidence at all...

 Also I would like to see you in that test, identifying those power cables, that you say you know by heart, to see if you can identify them 100% of the times, as you claim to be able to do, but in front of others...LOL...


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The problem with those articles that you said that show the claimed differences (and that indeed most of the times, only said they hear them with no prove of any kind) is that they can be only found in audio magazines, and most of the times with no scientific base at all. And we all know that all these magazines, are also paid by the adds that those same cable manufacturers post in their pages, though they are a little dubious, IMO.

 BTW I have heard some of the equipment reviewed in those good magazines, expecting to hear what they said, and honestly, my experience have been so far from the reality they claim. Even more, some of the amps I know by heart, have been reviewed by them, showing a completely different scenario of what they indeed are, to my ears, in other words I consider reviews and articles in magazines, very subjective opinions as well... 

 OTOH I do not know of any of those articles, that even try to prove the differences of different aftermarket expensive cables, that have been published in any EE text book, or good book that could be used for instruction in any EE course, in any university or college, so till then, to me they are not evidence at all...

 Also I would like to see you in that test, identifying those power cables, that you say you know by heart, to see if you can identify them 100% of the times, as you claim to be able to do, but in front of others...LOL...
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

you can find several college level books that may help you understand cables: fund of applied electromagnetic and semiconductor theory (basic principle) by Singh, among others

 you are wandering why would anything pertains to the cable theory be found in a semiconductor theory book....well that book has a section on electrons in solids; oh..the good stuff - valance electrons, lattice, work function, electron affinity, Fermi level....damn surprised I can remember this much...LMAO


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Chu* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I've suggested before:

 1. Build 3 identical systems. Then swap one with a set of boutique cables by an outside observer, and have them obfuscate the systems. 

 2. Challenge people to find the different one.

 3. Publish the results. Leave analysis to others._

 

Your test seems more aligned with what Sovkiller has in mind: to determine whether anyone among several people could distinguish the presence of some (unfamiliar) fancy and expensive cable compared to way less expensive cables, all within an unfamiliar rig.

 It is a valuable experiment, don't get me wrong. But it is a significantly different challenge to have people try to distinguish things they aren't familiar with, vs. people showing (or not being able to show) that they can indeed distinguish what they are familiar with and what they already believe to be able to distinguish.

 Now that I think about it, this could be a very valuable extra test in the procedure. It would be very interesting to correlate the degree of accuracy/inaccuracy in the tests of subjects with their familiar rig and cables vs. how they do in this common test for all subjects using a not necessarily familiar rig and cables.


 PS. Yet, I wouldn't encourage your point 1: "Build 3 identical systems." They won't be truly identical, so swapping the cables won't be the only difference. They will be different systems after all, even though with same type and model of components besides the cables.

 A rigurous enough test would require using exactly the same whole rig, just changing the cables under consideration. Only then there would be no doubt: anyone reliably telling that setup apart would have identified the only difference in it: the presence of that cable.


----------



## WindowsX

To be honest, I've never seen anyone using over $10k rig with stock cables and power cords. If you found ones, let me know.


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_you can find several college level books that may help you understand cables: fund of applied electromagnetic and semiconductor theory (basic principle) by Singh, among others

 you are wandering why would anything pertains to the cable theory be found in a semiconductor theory book....well that book has a section on electrons in solids; oh..the good stuff - valance electrons, lattice, work function, electron affinity, Fermi level....damn surprised I can remember this much...LMAO_

 

I was not clear enough, sorry, we all know that the materials are among cables are different, the metals are different and the geometries are different, that is a fact, what we are looking is to know is how those variables may impact or not the performance of a cable for audio frequencies, and how they can modify the sound to an extend that could be audible by a human being...

 Even the parameters we know off: R, L and C are different, we know that, but how do they impact on the sound is the question and if this differences could or not be audible, and measurable. If they are, why nobody had been able to elaborate the theory around that?


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_To be honest, I've never seen anyone using over $10k rig with stock cables and power cords. If you found ones, let me know._

 

You are not helping your case, at all, with these arguments, so you use them because your system is over 10K, and if everybody that has a system over 10K uses expensive cables, you have to, like monkey see-monkey do mentality, and of course, you also hear the differences, as they do, or you will be less than them...LOL...
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I do not use stock neither, but that does not prove that the differences exist, just because we have not seen a millionaire driving a Honda Accord, that doesn't mean the Honda is a bad car....

 BTW I'm far from being in the 10K range and I do not use stock neither, I use BJC and Quail power cords, just because they are overall better cables and well done, but that is not the problem we are trying to see why the difference between a well done cable like for example the BJC, and a $3000.00 cable you use...


----------



## Chu

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Your test seems more aligned with what Sovkiller has in mind: to determine whether anyone among several people could distinguish the presence of some (unfamiliar) fancy and expensive cable compared to way less expensive cables, all within an unfamiliar rig.

 It is a valuable experiment, don't get me wrong. But it is a significantly different challenge to have people try to distinguish things they aren't familiar with, vs. people showing (or not being able to show) that they can indeed distinguish what they are familiar with and what they already believe to be able to distinguish.

 Now that I think about it, this could be a very valuable extra test in the procedure. It would be very interesting to correlate the degree of accuracy/inaccuracy in the tests of subjects with their familiar rig and cables vs. how they do in this common test for all subjects using a not necessarily familiar rig and cables.


 PS. Yet, I wouldn't encourage your point 1: "Build 3 identical systems." They won't be truly identical, so swapping the cables won't be the only difference. They will be different systems after all, even though with same type and model of components besides the cables.

 A rigurous enough test would require using exactly the same whole rig, just changing the cables under consideration. Only then there would be no doubt: anyone reliably telling that setup apart would have identified the only difference in it: the presence of that cable._

 

I really hesitate to use the word "identical" for the reasons you say. That being said it's still a good enough test to challenge a lot of things people present as fast on _both_ sides of the debate, no matter the result. 

 I mean, even if everyone agreed that all three systems sounded incredibly different, taken at face value (as actually proving this, if someone wanted to, would take more tests but fairly trivial to conduct with the equipment on hand) would mean that the difference cables make is indistinguishable from manufacturer variance.

 I also would be interesting in doing the "silver vs. copper" pass around test, i.e. using extremely high quality DIY terminators and obfuscating the cable itself, however the passions are so great on both sides of the debate that I honestly would worry that some with the necessary equipment would be tempted to cheat. It's been suspected before on other double blind tests of this nature (specifically regarding codec testing on Hydrogen Audio) when people essentially are putting their reputation on the line (or in this case, "I can hear the difference between these cables).


----------



## WindowsX

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You are not helping your case, at all, with these arguments, so you use them because your system is over 10K, and if everybody that has a system over 10K uses expensive cables, you have to, like monkey see-monkey do mentality, and of course, you also hear the differences, as they do, or you will be less than them...LOL...
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I do not use stock neither, but that does not prove that the differences exist, just because we have not seen a millionaire driving a Honda Accord, that doesn't mean the Honda is a bad car....

 BTW I'm far from being in the 10K range and I do not use stock neither, I use BJC and Quail power cords, just because they are overall better cables and well done, but that is not the problem we are trying to see why the difference between a well done cable like for example the BJC, and a $3000.00 cable you use..._

 

You're the most stubborn person I've seen so far... If you dare to test it by yourself, buy some $100 cables for your RPX-33. That's my only advise for you. I couldn't bear myself communicating with person like you anymore. I give it up.


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You're the most stubborn person I've seen so far... If you dare to test it by yourself, buy some $100 cables for your RPX-33. That's my only advise for you. I couldn't bear myself communicating with person like you anymore. I give it up._

 


 Still no evidence...??? Next, please...!!!

 I would like that you dare to accept any DBT you want, in front of others, to see you fail miserably ... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 and not with $100.00 cable, with a $3000.00 one...


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I was not clear enough, sorry, we all know that the materials are among cables are different, the metals are different and the geometries are different, that is a fact, what we are looking is to know is how those variables may impact or not the performance of a cable for audio frequencies, and how they can modify the sound to an extend that could be audible by a human being...

 Even the parameters we know off: R, L and C are different, we know that, but how do they impact on the sound is the question and if this differences could or not be audible, and measurable. If they are, why nobody had been able to elaborate the theory around that?_

 

you can view cable as a filter with H(s) function; of course that H(s) can only be obtained at a particular instance because the function itself is changing as the frequency changes. very confusing stuff.

 Its simpler to look at a snap shot in time and calculate H(s) of the cable as a filter; now just take the input (got FFT it) and multiply H(s), and you get the output. whether you can hear it is dependent on the person. Some people can run at 30mph, other can only run at 1mph 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I say if you can calculate it, you can hear it, maybe not by you, but someone out there with super hearing can certainly hear it


----------



## Akathisia

Who would've guessed that this thread would disintegrate into another cable war. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Whenever I use the search feature to read about cable brands, the older threads (up to mid 2006 it seems) don't contain this beaten horse. I wish I would have been a member of head-fi before this all started...

 I really wish there would be a "for cables" and "against cables" section. Or at least a reputation function, so the high post-count trolls could be quickly identified by newer impressionable members (not pointing fingers).


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_you can view cable as a filter with H(s) function; of course that H(s) can only be obtained at a particular instance because the function itself is changing as the frequency changes. very confusing stuff.

 Its simpler to look at a snap shot in time and calculate H(s) of the cable as a filter; now just take the input (got FFT it) and multiply H(s), and you get the output. whether you can hear it is dependent on the person. Some people can run at 30mph, other can only run at 1mph 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I say if you can calculate it, you can hear it, maybe not by you, but someone out there with super hearing can certainly hear it 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

Not very confusing, but very complicated if you ask me, and very complicated to figure also the mathematical model, to get the expression that may command those changes over time. 
 Even if we do not hear those differences (which I believe that some does. maybe not me, but others with better hearing) it will be nice that someone spend some time trying to figure out a feasible way of trying to demonstrate the differences, and the way to quatify them. 
 Seriously this will be a good starting point to create the proper theory in the desing of cables, and the proper way, instead of the hit and miss, and the consequent rip offs, that may derivate of such non accurate calculations, design technics, and bad assumptions, that we have right now, don't you think?


----------



## Agent Kang

This thread is very much alive i see. Whatever happened to Patrick btw? 

 Nvm, carry on folks.


----------



## WindowsX

Hey, SovKiller. If you check couple pages ago, some people showed up with their own experiments to confirm cables bring difference in sound.


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Hey, SovKiller. I don't believer that headphone will make different because there's no evidence I can find to see its difference. Do you agree with me, SovKiller?_

 

Now you're just being silly. Such evidence is readily available. *Every* headphone manufacturer posts specifications for its products, and there are empirical measurements available from third parties such as HeadRoom. In fact, I posted an example earlier in the thread when you made this same argument.


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Now you're just being silly. Such evidence is readily available. *Every* headphone manufacturer posts specifications for its products, and there are empirical measurements available from third parties such as HeadRoom. In fact, I posted an example earlier in the thread when you made this same argument._

 

Also we have the curves for each headphone Headroom has them published...


----------



## WindowsX

And cables has its specifications like % of materials used, shielding, grounding, the way to improve cables that non-believer ignores them. ha? Why didn't you trust what manufacture said about cables, then? WAY TOO UNFAIR.

 So everything in http://www.head-fi.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=33 is BS, right? What the heck are you doing here for if you believe cable has no effects? This forum stands for people who believe in cable tweaking. Find another hobby besides ruining forum's principles, please.


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_And cables has its specifications like % of materials used, shielding, grounding, the way to improve cables that non-believer ignores them. ha? Why didn't you trust what manufacture said about cables, then? WAY TOO UNFAIR.

 So everything in http://www.head-fi.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=33 is BS, right? What the heck are you doing here for if you believe cable has no effects? This forum stands for people who believe in cable tweaking. Find another hobby besides ruining forum's principles, please._

 

Yes, but these are not specs, these are reviews of some guys, that as you do claim to hear them...guys like you or me...Do not get pissed, this is a free forum in which anybody could post their ideas, concerns and can question if one thing is truth or not, why not? 

 We have some manufacturers that publish the specs, usually the less expensive BTW. onthe rest what i ahve seen is a bunch of voodoo and snake oil BS, in the websites, as speed of light, even God was involved once, and all this crap and pretends us to trust that, the only parameters we know in cables are L,C, R, quality of dielectric maybe, and Z, and any combination of them, most of the times they even never publish that, you know why? Any other ten times less expensive will have very similar ones...


----------



## rsaavedra

Another very recently created thread indicates James Randi is awarding $1 million to anyone who can prove that some $7K+ speaker cables are any better than ordinary Monster Cables

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=263530

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/calling-*...ter-305549.php

 No surprise that the article does mention DBT as the mechanism to prove whether the extraordinary claims about that cable are true.


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Another very recently created thread indicates James Randi is awarding $1 million to anyone who can prove that some $7K+ speaker cables are any better than ordinary Monster Cables

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=263530

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/calling-*...ter-305549.php

 No surprise that the article does mention DBT as the mechanism to prove whether the extraordinary claims about that cable are true._

 


 WindowsX, here is your chance of becoming a millionaire...!!!!!...
	

	
	
		
		

		
			








:veryevi l:


----------



## WindowsX

that makes me feel gross.....ignorant people.


----------



## LawnGnome

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_that makes me feel gross.....ignorant people._

 

If they are so ignorant, do it and try to take the "ignorant" people's money.


----------



## WindowsX

With their rules? No way. We'll never win against boss that use cheat codes.


----------



## fwojciec

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_With their rules? No way. We'll never win against boss that use cheat codes._

 

What cheat codes?


----------



## tot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *fwojciec* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_What cheat codes?_

 

DBT?


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_What the heck are you doing here for if you believe cable has no effects? This forum stands for people who believe in cable tweaking. Find another hobby besides ruining forum's principles, please._

 

You make it sound like a church!

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You make it sound like a church!

 See ya
 Steve_

 

Well at least finaly he admited that people *believe* in cable tweaking, and thanks God is only a believe, and not a fact...


----------



## tot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_What the heck are you doing here for if you believe cable has no effects? This forum stands for people who believe in cable tweaking._

 

But this thread is about Patrick, isn't it?

 When someone mentions differences between cables a war seems to break between believers and non-believers. I am generally non-believer but it does not prevent me replace headphone cables with supposedly better ones 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 However no blind test I know has ever ended with conclusion about the issue. Why is that? Even Randi's $1 million has no takers. People claim huge differences (Patrick must have incredibly fast and tight bass after all the tweaks combined) and nobody can do a successful DBT to reproduce the result?


----------



## kpeezy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_With their rules? No way. We'll never win against boss that use cheat codes._

 

Never win against their rules? The setup is confirmed by the participant before the testing starts unless I read it wrong.


----------



## Logistics

I swapped out my 16ga. monster cable for some 16ga. solid core wire, of the same length, too mind you, between my reciever and speakers, and alot of the bass went away and the sound was overall more dead sounding; more cold I guess you would say.


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Logistics* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I swapped out my 16ga. monster cable for some 16ga. solid core wire, of the same length, too mind you, between my reciever and speakers, and alot of the bass went away and the sound was overall more dead sounding; more cold I guess you would say._

 

It sounds like you wired your speakers out of phase.


----------



## chesebert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Yes, but these are not specs, these are reviews of some guys, that as you do claim to hear them...guys like you or me...Do not get pissed, this is a free forum in which anybody could post their ideas, concerns and can question if one thing is truth or not, why not? 

 We have some manufacturers that publish the specs, usually the less expensive BTW. onthe rest what i ahve seen is a bunch of voodoo and snake oil BS, in the websites, as speed of light, even God was involved once, and all this crap and pretends us to trust that, the only parameters we know in cables are L,C, R, quality of dielectric maybe, and Z, and any combination of them, most of the times they even never publish that, you know why? Any other ten times less expensive will have very similar ones..._

 

measuring cable at DC is a royal waste of time; I don't know why anyone would do it.


----------



## WindowsX

Simply, Because they can't afford cables thinking it's too expensive and they want to prove something that they're wisemen who decided not to take much effort for cables. Cheap trick, ha?


----------



## Zorander

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_It sounds like you wired your speakers out of phase._

 

x2. I had the same experience before, just that I wired one speaker out of phase and it was the only one lacking bass so I knew what was possibly wrong. 

 Speaking about speaker cables, sadly it is the very type of cable where I am hard-pressed to hear a difference. There is hardly any difference when swapping between my QED XT-400 and a set of thick-gauged pure copper cables (which is still very decent stuff, mind you). Goes to show you need not spend fortunes when you already have decent stuff.


----------



## Zorander

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Simply, Because they can't afford cables thinking it's too expensive and they want to prove something that they're wisemen who decided not to take much effort for cables. Cheap *trick*, ha?_

 

Let me ask you this: who is tricking who?


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Simply, Because they can't afford cables thinking it's too expensive and they want to prove something that they're wisemen who decided not to take much effort for cables. Cheap trick, ha?_

 

Perhaps you missed the part where Randi is offering *$1 million dollars.* Say what you want about his challenge, but I hardly think that he is making the challenge "because he can't afford cables."


----------



## WindowsX

I don't care about that stupid challenge. Let us go straight. Is there anybody who actually tried comparison between $3000 cable and $100 cable or even stock cable and found no difference?


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *fwojciec* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_What cheat codes?_

 

WindowsX: you still haven't answered this question. How exactly is it that you think that Randi's challenge uses "cheat codes"?


----------



## kpeezy

I don't know why I keep reading this thread. All it is is WindowsX trolling saying everyone else is poor and has bad ears.


----------



## naamanf

People once thought the world was flat.

 Tomatoes were poisonous.

 Bloodletting cured disease.

 You could turn lead into gold.

 Carrot Top was funny.

 $$$$ speaker cable made a difference.

 Stupid people.


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Simply, Because they can't afford cables thinking it's too expensive and they want to prove something that they're wisemen who decided not to take much effort for cables. Cheap trick, ha?_

 

Cables are the LEAST expensive high end stuff out there. Anyone can afford a few hundred bucks. Plus, the cost of manufacturing them is extremely low, allowing a huge markup. That's why you see a lot more hucksterism on high end cables than you do high end speakers or high end electronics. 

 Inexperienced audiophiles devote WAY too much attention to them- because they can afford them. It's like putting Ferrari hubcaps on your Ford. It's bling bling, but it does absolutely nothing to increase performance.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chesebert* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I say if you can calculate it, you can hear it, maybe not by you, but someone out there with super hearing can certainly hear it_

 

James Randi better not offer his challenge to bats!

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_However no blind test I know has ever ended with conclusion about the issue. Why is that?_

 

That's simple. People *want* to be satisfied with the things they own. They *want* to think they always make the best decisions. When someone comes on this board and asks "What's the best DAP?" or "What are the best sounding cans?" do you think many people recommend something they don't own or are planning to buy themselves? A lot of them aren't really recommending something that would work well for the person asking the question, they're justifying their own purchases to themselves.

 Put yourself in the cable believer's shoes. They came to this board and read some threads where people went on and on about the night and day difference between Atlas Titan Thor cables and regular old (spit!) CHEAP cables. They went to the Atlas Titan Thor website and read a bunch of technical double speak that they didn't really understand, but it all sounded good. So they clicked on "buy it now".

 The cables arrived in the mail, all shiny and covered in the finest white samite. They ceremoniously placed them on their system, discarding the old "inferior" PLASTIC covered ones, and put on their best sounding CD... the classical one that they never play because they don't really like classical- they like hot mastered late 70s FM rock- but the classical one *sounds* better. "Wow! Listen to those piccolos! I can hear every frab of the oboe now!" They throw the old cables out, go back to listening to their crappy recorded hard rock, secure in the knowlege that all those overdriven peaks are being reproduced in pristine perfection.

 Then they come back here and read someone saying that cables don't make a difference. Do they go back and do a direct comparison or conduct a DBT to see if there really is a difference? No. They say they don't *believe* in DBTs and direct comparisons. They get mad if someone points out that their opinion might not be based on facts. They don't want to admit the truth to themselves, even though they suspect that there really might not be a difference. As they argue, defending their position, they dig their hole deeper. They get so invested in cables making a difference, there's no way that they could admit it even if it was proven to them that they don't. There's no curse on being a cable skeptic who goes over to the other side, but you better believe that one has to eat a lot of crow to go from believer to skeptic.

 If people were only fooling themselves, then a shrug and the old saying "A fool and his money are soon parted" would apply. But the problem is, to justify their cable belief, they have to proclaim it loudly and evangelically from the mountain tops. That results in MORE people coming to this board and reading threads where people go on and on about the night and day difference between Atlas Titan Thor cables and regular old (spit!) CHEAP cables.

 The cycle repeats itself and the cable snake oil salesmen get richer. Like it says on the map at the zoo... "You Are Here".

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## WindowsX

Strange, yesterday I brought my friend who doesn't even know about hi-fi stuff to hi-fi shop and ask my friend who's salesperson in there demonstrating cable exchange with his eyes closed. He said it sounds *CLEARY* different, like a different speaker. But when his eyes opened, he was surprised seeing only cables were changed and another speakers set nearby is just a stand to trick him so badly lol. Hmm....maybe his ears get oiled by those cables before running this test, who knows?


----------



## naamanf

My friend came by the other day and said he could turn himself into a rabbit. He pulled out a magic wand and said "abbra-ka-rabbit" and with a puff of smoke turned into a rabbit. True story.


----------



## WindowsX

sarcasm? Why didn't you use stock cables instead of your own homemade saying it gave you difference in your thread then?

 Anyway, http://www.audioholics.com/education...ke-oil-article

 I guess this should be the end for this pointless discussion between believer and non-believer.


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Strange, yesterday I brought my friend who doesn't even know about hi-fi stuff to hi-fi shop and ask my friend who's salesperson in there..._

 

Uh... NEVER ever have a salesperson run a blind test. I have seen stereo salesmen tap bass controls behind their back to make a bookshelf speaker sound fuller. I've had them deliberately mislead me about which piece of equipment the switcher was set to so I would pick the item they got the biggest commission on. Even friends who happen to be stereo salesmen, used car dealers or lawyers shouldn't be taken without a grain of salt.

 YOU have to set up the test and make sure it's fair.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Anyway, http://www.audioholics.com/education...ke-oil-article I guess this should be the end for this pointless discussion between believer and non-believer._

 

You realize that you keep linking to pages that state the exact opposite of what you believe, right?

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## WindowsX

Well, my friend doesn't know it but I watch every single step that salesperson did and all he did was changing cables. Don't you ever wonder how can $10000 CD player will sound better than $1000 CD Player? Same question...


----------



## WindowsX

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You realize that you keep linking to pages that state the exact opposite of what you believe, right?

 See ya
 Steve_

 

And what are against aren't from audioquest. He said doing measuremeants is everything is useless.

 You can take a look in http://www.lessloss.com/specs.html too for more information.


----------



## bigshot

I watched a magician pull cards out of the air, and I too watched every single step that he did. It's the salesman's JOB to make you believe that he is selling you a better product than anyone else has. It's up to you to have the critical thinking to decide whether he really does have the best product or whether he is selling snake oil. I hope this doesn't disappoint you too much in the world you live in, but it is perfectly legal for salesmen to make exaggerated claims.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## bigshot

OK. This isn't meant as an insult. I just need to know who I'm talking to. How old are you WindowsX?

 Thanks
 Steve


----------



## WindowsX

But it's not related to my friend's story at all. Trying to deceive me, try it harder.

 I'm 21 and spent for stuff I want with my own money. And I valued it by myself and my own tests beforehanded.

 Btw, have you ever tried cable's comparison? I can say with confidence that $2500 power cord doesn't sound amazingly better than $500 cable and $3000 rca cables don't sound mightly blows away $300 rca cables. However, at the level that needs even less and less improvements like a bell from bottom-up, I couldn't help it but need to buy it for my stupid passionate desires.


----------



## Logistics

No sirs; it was not out of phase. The cable was marked just like my Monster Cable so that this doesn't happen. But I will remember what you say in case I'm ever working with unmarked cable and something doesn't sound right.


----------



## WindowsX

Who would believe that switching fuse's phase can make it sound a lot difference...It used to give me a big nightmare just because I inserted fuse in wrong direction and this isn't voodoo T_T

 Same goes to cables. Let me tell ya my real story. One day after receiving iMod Photo with ALO Super Cotton mini to mini cable, I tried it and found my previous bundled Panorama from iMod Photo is better. But when I try ALO cable again in opposite direction, it blowed my older Panorama away! Why? Don't ask me. I'm not Ken lol.


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You can take a look in http://www.lessloss.com/specs.html too for more information._

 

This article relates to measuring jitter. It has absolutely nothing at all do with cables.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Anyway, http://www.audioholics.com/education...ke-oil-article_

 

Note that the parent page of the page you linked to is entitled, "Top Ten Signs an Audio Cable Vendor is Selling You Snake Oil." That page includes a section called "Bonus Scams":

  Quote:


 Bonus Scams

 * Sells speaker cables or interconnects costing more than a plasma TV or a lease on a new Infinity G35 sports coupe.
_* * Claims wire is directional.*_
 * Slaps RLC boxes on their cables.
 * Claims of Speaker Cable Resonance at Audio Frequencies 
 

Now, you cite that page as support for the proposition that "this should be the end for this pointless discussion between believer and non-believer." Yet, just a few minutes later, you procede to tell an anecdote about how your ALO Super Cotton mini to mini cable is directional:

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Let me tell ya my real story. One day after receiving iMod Photo with ALO Super Cotton mini to mini cable, I tried it and found my previous bundled Panorama from iMod Photo is better. But when I try ALO cable again in opposite direction, it blowed my older Panorama away!_

 

Don't you see that you are repeatedly contradicting yourself?


----------



## Logistics

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *WindowsX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Who would believe that switching fuse's phase can make it sound a lot difference...It used to give me a big nightmare just because I inserted fuse in wrong direction and this isn't voodoo T_T

 Same goes to cables. Let me tell ya my real story. One day after receiving iMod Photo with ALO Super Cotton mini to mini cable, I tried it and found my previous bundled Panorama from iMod Photo is better. But when I try ALO cable again in opposite direction, it blowed my older Panorama away! Why? Don't ask me. I'm not Ken lol._

 

That's awesome! I'll have to experiment with this. Oh, and about those Super Cotton cables, are those just wire wrapped in cotton sheathing? I remember, alot of the Tube amp guys like to use solid core silver wire with cotton braided around the outside.

 Good times!


----------



## Patrick82

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_That's simple. People *want* to be satisfied with the things they own. They *want* to think they always make the best decisions. When someone comes on this board and asks "What's the best DAP?" or "What are the best sounding cans?" do you think many people recommend something they don't own or are planning to buy themselves? A lot of them aren't really recommending something that would work well for the person asking the question, they're justifying their own purchases to themselves.

 Put yourself in the cable believer's shoes. They came to this board and read some threads where people went on and on about the night and day difference between Atlas Titan Thor cables and regular old (spit!) CHEAP cables. They went to the Atlas Titan Thor website and read a bunch of technical double speak that they didn't really understand, but it all sounded good. So they clicked on "buy it now".

 The cables arrived in the mail, all shiny and covered in the finest white samite. They ceremoniously placed them on their system, discarding the old "inferior" PLASTIC covered ones, and put on their best sounding CD... the classical one that they never play because they don't really like classical- they like hot mastered late 70s FM rock- but the classical one *sounds* better. "Wow! Listen to those piccolos! I can hear every frab of the oboe now!" They throw the old cables out, go back to listening to their crappy recorded hard rock, secure in the knowlege that all those overdriven peaks are being reproduced in pristine perfection.

 Then they come back here and read someone saying that cables don't make a difference. Do they go back and do a direct comparison or conduct a DBT to see if there really is a difference? No. They say they don't *believe* in DBTs and direct comparisons. They get mad if someone points out that their opinion might not be based on facts. They don't want to admit the truth to themselves, even though they suspect that there really might not be a difference. As they argue, defending their position, they dig their hole deeper. They get so invested in cables making a difference, there's no way that they could admit it even if it was proven to them that they don't. There's no curse on being a cable skeptic who goes over to the other side, but you better believe that one has to eat a lot of crow to go from believer to skeptic.

 If people were only fooling themselves, then a shrug and the old saying "A fool and his money are soon parted" would apply. But the problem is, to justify their cable belief, they have to proclaim it loudly and evangelically from the mountain tops. That results in MORE people coming to this board and reading threads where people go on and on about the night and day difference between Atlas Titan Thor cables and regular old (spit!) CHEAP cables.

 The cycle repeats itself and the cable snake oil salesmen get richer. Like it says on the map at the zoo... "You Are Here".

 See ya
 Steve_

 

That is what most of the audiophiles do, but that doesn't mean everyone does it. After a year I still recommend Tara Labs Zero interconnect for the most neutral sound even though I have never heard or owned Tara Labs's products, I only need to look at the design to know it is better because I have modified my Valhalla in a similar way. I only use Valhalla interconnect because I like the boosted whiteness, it's a great match for mp3's.

 I also recommend $300 computer more than $10 000 transport because it gives a better flavor after adding Valhalla power cord to it. I don't like neutral sound, it is too boring.

 After I bought my first Valhalla power cord I made A/B-ing before buying another Valhalla, then I did it again before my 3rd Valhalla. Then I sliced my Valhallas and had the 3rd Valhalla left over, and I was going to sell it for the same price as I bought it for. But then I made a blind test and the difference was big enough for me to want to keep it as a souvenier. Valhalla is that good.


----------



## vcoheda

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_This article relates to measuring jitter. It has absolutely nothing at all do with cables.

 Note that the parent page of the page you linked to is entitled, "Top Ten Signs an Audio Cable Vendor is Selling You Snake Oil." That page includes a section called "Bonus Scams":

 Now, you cite that page as support for the proposition that "this should be the end for this pointless discussion between believer and non-believer." Yet, just a few minutes later, you procede to tell an anecdote about how your ALO Super Cotton mini to mini cable is directional:

 Don't you see that you are repeatedly contradicting yourself?_

 

Febs:

 why do you involve yourself in this mess/pointlessness. you seem like a reasonable person. if you don't believe in cables, then that's fine. your opinion. not my experience. but that is irrelevant. but why involve yourself, as you don't seem like a troll like most of these other guys.

 boredom?


----------



## Gabriel Possenti

Holy crap.. check this out!

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/calling-*...ter-305549.php


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_That's simple. People *want* to be satisfied with the things they own. They *want* to think they always make the best decisions. When someone comes on this board and asks "What's the best DAP?" or "What are the best sounding cans?" do you think many people recommend something they don't own or are planning to buy themselves? A lot of them aren't really recommending something that would work well for the person asking the question, they're justifying their own purchases to themselves.

 Put yourself in the cable believer's shoes. They came to this board and read some threads where people went on and on about the night and day difference between Atlas Titan Thor cables and regular old (spit!) CHEAP cables. They went to the Atlas Titan Thor website and read a bunch of technical double speak that they didn't really understand, but it all sounded good. So they clicked on "buy it now".

 The cables arrived in the mail, all shiny and covered in the finest white samite. They ceremoniously placed them on their system, discarding the old "inferior" PLASTIC covered ones, and put on their best sounding CD... the classical one that they never play because they don't really like classical- they like hot mastered late 70s FM rock- but the classical one *sounds* better. "Wow! Listen to those piccolos! I can hear every frab of the oboe now!" They throw the old cables out, go back to listening to their crappy recorded hard rock, secure in the knowlege that all those overdriven peaks are being reproduced in pristine perfection.

 Then they come back here and read someone saying that cables don't make a difference. Do they go back and do a direct comparison or conduct a DBT to see if there really is a difference? No. They say they don't *believe* in DBTs and direct comparisons. They get mad if someone points out that their opinion might not be based on facts. They don't want to admit the truth to themselves, even though they suspect that there really might not be a difference. As they argue, defending their position, they dig their hole deeper. They get so invested in cables making a difference, there's no way that they could admit it even if it was proven to them that they don't. There's no curse on being a cable skeptic who goes over to the other side, but you better believe that one has to eat a lot of crow to go from believer to skeptic.

 If people were only fooling themselves, then a shrug and the old saying "A fool and his money are soon parted" would apply. But the problem is, to justify their cable belief, they have to proclaim it loudly and evangelically from the mountain tops. That results in MORE people coming to this board and reading threads where people go on and on about the night and day difference between Atlas Titan Thor cables and regular old (spit!) CHEAP cables.

 The cycle repeats itself and the cable snake oil salesmen get richer. Like it says on the map at the zoo... "You Are Here".

 See ya
 Steve_

 

Steve you made me cry man, this fragment is now saved in my PC....if I would be trying to put words is somoene's mouth, or mind, I could not be so accurate than in this case man. Paranomal, are you psychic man by any chance??? We shoud apply for the test I think....OMG!!!

 That is 100% and exactly what I do beleive, thanks Steve for giving words to this idea as I would never found the right words to express it, sorry for the cable believers...and that is exactly how the human mind works...IMO and IME...


----------



## monolith

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Gabriel Possenti* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Holy crap.. check this out!

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/calling-*...ter-305549.php_

 

Holy crap! Check these out!

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=263738

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=263714

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=263698

 Those are just top level posts, too.


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Gabriel Possenti* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Holy crap.. check this out!

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/calling-*...ter-305549.php_

 

Man we are talking about this same link for three days, and now showed up with this, a little late I think...


----------



## monolith

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *vcoheda* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Febs:

 why do you involve yourself in this mess/pointlessness. you seem like a reasonable person. if you don't believe in cables, then that's fine. your opinion. not my experience. but that is irrelevant. but why involve yourself, as you don't seem like a troll like most of these other guys.

 boredom?_

 

It's always nice to have a calm, rationally thought out counterpoint to the inanity going on here. He's like a sane reference point.


----------



## bigshot

WindowsX, you're a nice guy. But you're just starting out. There's a lot more to learn when it comes to just about everything in life. You'd do a lot better to seek out information and try to understand it for yourself, rather than grabbing at info in web searches to make a point in an internet debate that you aren't quite equipped to manage. That's friendly advice from someone who was in your shoes once, not an insult. If you'd like folks to help you understand things, just ask. Most experienced people are more than happy to share if you approach them the right way. But you have to be willing to listen and you have to try to understand, even if the info is different than what you expect. There are a million surprises in life.

 vcocheda, a friendly comment for you too... Febs was reacting to the exact same thing I was. The linked article wasn't even remotely about what we were discussing. You're right that the discussion isn't going to go anywhere since one of the sides just doesn't understand the subject being discussed. But you don't have to single out Febs to tell him he doesn't have a right to comment. He obviously does know what he's talking about.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *vcoheda* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Febs:

 why do you involve yourself in this mess/pointlessness. you seem like a reasonable person. if you don't believe in cables, then that's fine. your opinion. not my experience. but that is irrelevant. but why involve yourself, as you don't seem like a troll like most of these other guys._

 

Sometimes I ask myself the same question! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Seriously, though, mostly I find the discussion interesting and occasionally informative. I also dislike irrational thought, and I have a tendency to react to it, so I end up getting drawn into these threads.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Gabriel Possenti* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Holy crap.. check this out!

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/calling-*...ter-305549.php_

 

Perhaps you should read the past few pages of this thread.


----------



## fwojciec

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_That's simple. People *want* to be satisfied with the things they own. They *want* to think they always make the best decisions. When someone comes on this board and asks "What's the best DAP?" or "What are the best sounding cans?" do you think many people recommend something they don't own or are planning to buy themselves? A lot of them aren't really recommending something that would work well for the person asking the question, they're justifying their own purchases to themselves.

 Put yourself in the cable believer's shoes. They came to this board and read some threads where people went on and on about the night and day difference between Atlas Titan Thor cables and regular old (spit!) CHEAP cables. They went to the Atlas Titan Thor website and read a bunch of technical double speak that they didn't really understand, but it all sounded good. So they clicked on "buy it now".

 The cables arrived in the mail, all shiny and covered in the finest white samite. They ceremoniously placed them on their system, discarding the old "inferior" PLASTIC covered ones, and put on their best sounding CD... the classical one that they never play because they don't really like classical- they like hot mastered late 70s FM rock- but the classical one *sounds* better. "Wow! Listen to those piccolos! I can hear every frab of the oboe now!" They throw the old cables out, go back to listening to their crappy recorded hard rock, secure in the knowlege that all those overdriven peaks are being reproduced in pristine perfection.

 Then they come back here and read someone saying that cables don't make a difference. Do they go back and do a direct comparison or conduct a DBT to see if there really is a difference? No. They say they don't *believe* in DBTs and direct comparisons. They get mad if someone points out that their opinion might not be based on facts. They don't want to admit the truth to themselves, even though they suspect that there really might not be a difference. As they argue, defending their position, they dig their hole deeper. They get so invested in cables making a difference, there's no way that they could admit it even if it was proven to them that they don't. There's no curse on being a cable skeptic who goes over to the other side, but you better believe that one has to eat a lot of crow to go from believer to skeptic.

 If people were only fooling themselves, then a shrug and the old saying "A fool and his money are soon parted" would apply. But the problem is, to justify their cable belief, they have to proclaim it loudly and evangelically from the mountain tops. That results in MORE people coming to this board and reading threads where people go on and on about the night and day difference between Atlas Titan Thor cables and regular old (spit!) CHEAP cables.

 The cycle repeats itself and the cable snake oil salesmen get richer. Like it says on the map at the zoo... "You Are Here".

 See ya
 Steve_

 

This deserves to be quoted and quoted and quoted and quoted 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Great post!


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_thanks Steve for giving words to this idea as I would never found the right words to express it, sorry for the cable believers...and that is exactly how the human mind works._

 

Human beings aren't that hard to understand... after all, most of us are human!

 Sometime, I'll fill you in on a theory I have that you might not agree with... neutrality *is* euphony.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_WindowsX, you're a nice guy. But you're just starting out. There's a lot more to learn when it comes to just about everything in life. You'd do a lot better to seek out information and try to understand it for yourself, rather than grabbing at info in web searches to make a point in an internet debate that you aren't quite equipped to manage. That's friendly advice from someone who was in your shoes once, not an insult. If you'd like folks to help you understand things, just ask. Most experienced people are more than happy to share if you approach them the right way. But you have to be willing to listen and you have to try to understand, even if the info is different than what you expect. There are a million surprises in life.

 See ya
 Steve_

 

Grow up and getting older is mandatory, but to mature is optional... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 IMO there are two big groups of inquisitive persons, the ones who ask because they really want to know, understand things better, and find out about different opinions, even while them, may include some opinions completely opposite of what they believe. And there are others that only ask becasue they need to confirm one more time, what they are 100% sure of, regardless of being right or wrong...in the first case the conversation is a pleasure, and could be really interesting, and you cna learn a lot, on the second case the conversation is a waste of time...


----------



## bigshot

I often learn more from people I disagree with than I do from people I agree with.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Human beings aren't that hard to understand... after all, most of us are human!

 Sometime, I'll fill you in on a theory I have that you might not agree with... neutrality *is* euphony.

 See ya
 Steve_

 

I'm all ears...and maybe it is, as a concept. But I can tell you, that if it is, then it is not the same concept I have heard of what neutrality in known here. 
 My point behind this quote in my signature, is that is really hard to determine how a recording really sounds like, even if you made it, there are always elements beyond your control, that will attempt against the accuracy of the result....and then what pisses my off, is that intead of saying "I like the way this or that sounds" or this or that sonds like in real life, etc...They begin with the BS of neutrality, and accuracy...maybe I got the concepts wrong, who knows!!! But IMO in order to know if something is accurate or neutral, in the first instance you need to know how it is supposed to sound ideally...and that IMO is always an X to find...

 Anyway it will be really good to hear that, a real shame that you live so far...a couple of Jacky D's listening those "old bad rock recordings from the 70's" in my Editions and RPX-33 will be not that bad...


----------

