Blind Power Cord Test & results

Sorry for my rant here, but you guys kill me with the lack of links. The directions on how to post a link is found directly under the data input area and is labeled "No html, but you may use markup tags". Clicking on that will show you exactly how to post different types of links.

If you are in the middle of a post and forget how to post a link, you can even click on the directions below you post, see how it is done and then click your web browser's "back" button to return to your post as it was. You can do this as many times as it takes with no fear of losing the data that you've already entered.

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_11_4/feature-article-blind-test-power-cords-12-2004.html

Other than that, i've done testing where the differences in power cabling was both highly audible and measurable. The fact that the differences were so audibly noticeable was what caused me to take test measurements. The only thing altered during the test was one power cord as fed to a digital source component. The frequency response showed measurable deviations both in the warmth region and in the extreme treble region. Other than that, i'm quite certain that spectral analysis would show differences in the noise floor of a component when comparing "optimized" power cords vs more conventional designs. Sean
>

Dragon1952: This has nothing to do with "audio" or "snobbery". Cutting and pasting isn't a big deal, but if you want someone to look at something, the most logical thing to do is to make it easy for them to do so. Otherwise, it is kind of like saying "i've got evidence but you've got to go get it yourself if you're interested. This is where it's at, so go look at it and tell me what you think about it". Obviously, this isn't quite as simple as making it available on the spot, nor are you as likely to get as many to participate.

Other than that, i use my drop-down menu somewhat like a "favourites". By cutting and pasting, it gets full of crap that i'll probably never want to visit again. Given that i like to do things that way and a few others that i know do too, and providing a link is both easy to do and more convenient for the others viewing such a thread, why not take the extra 10 - 30 seconds and provide a link?

Other than that, you took the time to criticize my comments but you couldn't take the time to offer some input on the subject being discussed. What was your motive for posting such a comment to begin with and what did it accomplish? Sean
>

PS... What's lazier or more snobby: telling someone to fetch it for themselves and refusing to learn how to provide a link or someone that takes the time to provide a link for the convenience of others and at the same time, tries to show them how they can further their computer literacy skills? After resolving that puzzle, i think that you'll find that your original observation / comment is full of holes.

Quad made a very unique device for testing componentry in a direct A vs B mode, but it doesn't work like a typical ABX type box. This device actually allows you to insert another preamp or amp in series with your existing system and switch it in and out, either in a controlled fashion for blind testing or at random, for double blind testing. This allows one to see whether the addition of another component alters the performance of the system, in what way it alters it, how stable the circuitry is as the system is changed, if the differences are both audible and repeatable, etc... From what i understand, there were only three of these devices made. I'm been working on picking one of these up for some time, it's just a matter of hooking up with the owner of this item. Sean
>

One has to be intimitaly familiar with all of the gear being used and the recording in order to identify if there has been a change made. Picking specific parts of a song to use as a cue tends to work well, but if one wasn't quite familiar with the song or how it was specifically reproduced on the system to begin with, they would be guessing just like anybody else.

As such, short term listening tests when one is not familiar with the system and / or the recording is next to useless, especially when the differences may be quite subtle. Expecting someone to familiarize themselves with both a song and potentially different types of presentations at the same time is too much to ask simultaneously.

As such, these types of tests are basically set up to produce a negative right from the beginning. The one exception is when you get a highly trained listener with excellent hearing acuity. Even then, they are swimming against the current for the above mentioned reasons. Sean
>

Drubin: My post was not to say that one CAN NOT tell differences right away, but that many differences are subtle and could easily be lost "in the heat of the moment".

As i mentioned above, if i had not heard instant differences when changing one power cord for another power cord, i would not have taken the time to confirm or deny what i heard via test measurements. The differences were that obvious, but then again, i was already familiar with the sound of my system and that song as played on it. Had i not been familiar with either the components or song used, those differences might not have jumped out at me quite as quickly.

Performing AB testing with a completely unknown set of variables is kind of like trying to find your way in an unfamiliar territory with a lot of distractions taking place. This is much harder than if you've been down that road many, many times before and know what to expect. This is not to say that it can't be done, only that it probably won't be nearly as quick and you might not be quite as sure-footed in the decisions that you make. Sean
>