2. cables
  3. 136769-457

DO CABLES REALLY MATTER?

Yes they do.  I’m not here to advocate for any particular brand but I’ve heard a lot and they do matter. High Fidelity reveal cables, Kubala Sosna Elation and Clarity Cable Natural. I’m having a listening session where all of them is doing a great job. I’ve had cables that were cheaper in my system but a nicely priced cable that matches your system is a must.  I’m not here to argue what I’m not hearing because I have a pretty good ear.  I’m enjoying these three brands today and each is presenting the music differently but very nicely. Those who say cables don’t matter. Get your ears checked.  I have a system that’s worth about 30 to 35k retail.  Now all of these brands are above 1k and up but they really are performing! What are your thoughts. 
calvinj
chemman
15 posts
 
@geoffkait 
I disagree as it seems highly unlikely that someone would pay money for something they expect to provide an enhancement and not expect it to work. The "hope" that it will enhance is correlated with the pleasure in the brain. Moreover, confirmation bias is not ordinarily found in an experiment that focuses on empirical data.  It is found in pseudo science that seeks to pass itself off as veracity. Much like your skilled listener experiment-- you can't control variables properly.  There is your logical fallacy. You can't quantify listening skills, just as glupson described above. You can give hearing tests to determine the frequencies people can hear, but you certainly cannot attach a number to what they can hear when listening to subtle music which is comprised of always changing frequencies from multiple different instruments.

The degree to which confirmation bias may effect someone is, as I said up for debate. But even after a failed expectation, they certainly are not going to say, "I am going to find another cable that does not live up to my expectations," (Popper) rather they will look for one that meets their needs/hopes.  As such, they will, until the second they make up their mind, be pre-disposed to a positive outcome.  How much so is unclear.

Attaching value, $500 vs. $5000 is a highly personal position that you can not possibly know except for yourself.  How do you know what sort of disposable cash flow "undecideds and newbies" have, and how much value they place on it? You can't, which is yet another logical fallacy. Also, an assumption that I am a "newbie," your use of the word and, is based upon what? My number of posts? There is your slippery slope.
Ag insider logo xs@2x
cleeds
5,944 posts
 
chemman
...  it seems highly unlikely that someone would pay money for something they expect to provide an enhancement and not expect it to work. The "hope" that it will enhance is correlated with the pleasure in the brain.
Before spending serious money on things like audio cables, I think most audiophiles have already experimented with them first. It's very common for audio dealers to hand a customer some used cable with a request that he try it in his system. No cost, no obligation. Many a skeptical audiophile has been surprised at the result, and the sale follows that. So in those instances, it's not the result of "confirmation bias."

Moreover, confirmation bias is not ordinarily found in an experiment that focuses on empirical data. It is found in pseudo science that seeks to pass itself off as veracity.
To the extent that confirmation bias exists, it is found everywhere, and the results of listening tests are themselves "empirical data."

You can't quantify listening skills ... You can give hearing tests to determine the frequencies people can hear, but you certainly cannot attach a number to what they can hear when listening to subtle music which is comprised of always changing frequencies from multiple different instruments.
This is completely mistaken. Many who have used double-blind listening tests - such as in designing audio codecs - absolutely have ranked listener acuity, usually after a training period to help them understand what they should be listening for in the test. As with many here, you seem to misunderstand the use of these tests.
chemman
15 posts
 
@geoffkait 

But I will agree that not everyone, in the whole world, is susceptible to confirmation bias in regard to a purchase.  That would be a generalization.  There have to be a few people out there that would be unaffected.  Not me mind you, if I bought a cable, for virtually any amount of money, that was supposed to improve the sonic capabilities and did not, I would be disappointed.  Because I would have been super hopeful and probably could have even talked myself into the belief the sound was better. I will try it some day soon, probably, but not now.  I am too busy enjoying the music. Enjoy it yourself. I imagine you have a nice set up!
chemman
15 posts
 
@cleeds 

I understand the test very well. "ranking listener acuity" is not empirical per se.  You are assigning numbers to a qualitative result.  You are attempting to control for variability by using a double-blind method of testing. The key is the word attempting. You are in no way controlling for human variability. Can knowledge be gleaned from such tests? Yes.  Is it definitive? No.  This is why these test will never be as reliable as someone running tests on the actual tracks of music through a sophisticated machine.  If total harmonic distortion and other variables t can be measured using actual electrical engineering equipment with associated units remain the same in a test of 10 different power cords, what explains improved sonic quality?
glupson
7,842 posts
 

clearthink,


I was probably not clear enough in my previous post. I am aware that $500 is almost a joke of a price in "audiophile" circles. That does not make anyone out of those circles wrong for wondering if paying so much money is worth it. Is it, indeed, cheap for such a wire will depend on opinion of the buyer, not on some universal "audiophile" understanding.


As far as you never seeing a $10 cable being as good as some dedicated audio cable costing much more, I keep my mind open that it is true and that you are absolutely correct about that. On the other side, just following this thread, there are many other people who would dispute that to the end of the world. Not the part of you not seeing it, but the fact that there is or there is not a difference. I stay out of that debate, partly because of my lack of experience.


My previous post was narrowly, although obviously unsuccessfully, aimed at "newbies, undecided, and curious (the word I added as it described me in that case)" and their possible approach to cables pricier than a regular restaurant meal or something like that. I only intended to point out that for such customers, $500 is the price they would initially consider quite high, but not obscenely so, for a cable and was correctly placed in the initial post. That was all that my post was about.


You are partially correct that my circle of acquaintances is not representative of universe of audiophiles in general. Mostly because none of my acquaintances would ever consider themselves as "audiophiles". Otherwise, my circle of acquaintances is perfectly representative of that universe of audiophiles in general. It is very broad with different approaches, personality traits, heights, weights, and whatever else could come to one’s mind. In this thread, you could see that universe of audiophiles in general consists of those who think that expensive cables are as close to a snake oil peddling as it gets and those who think they are one of the most important pieces in the reproduction equipment chain. How much wider could that universe in general be?

More to discover