09-08-11: Drubin
the fact that audio equipment makers are not shipping product using these "upmarket" power cords tell me that the people who actually make audio equipment aren't buying into these assertions.
All you'd have to do is visit a high-end audio show for a few minutes to see that your assertion is patently untrue. They don't ship their products with upmarket cords because of what it will do the price of the products, but many many of them chose to use those cords when they demonstrate their products.
surely you don't believe what you wrote: "because of what it (upmarket power cords) will do (sic) the price of the products"?!? i mean, if you're a "value" purchaser, you probably aren't buying high end audio. when a company claims that their "reference" products incorporate "price not object" design choices, do you *really* believe that they would cut corners on the power cords because of what it would to the price of the "cost no object" product? |
Yes they do Drubin but only because they usually share rooms and have to. |
the fact that audio equipment makers are not shipping product using these "upmarket" power cords tell me that the people who actually make audio equipment aren't buying into these assertions. All you'd have to do is visit a high-end audio show for a few minutes to see that your assertion is patently untrue. They don't ship their products with upmarket cords because of what it will do the price of the products, but many many of them chose to use those cords when they demonstrate their products. |
09-08-11: Zaikesman
What I must wonder is, how you would explain it if you came to my house, listened to my system with different power cord substitutions, and heard the correlated sonic effects that I hear? Because I don't see how you could fail to if you have ears on your head.
i've got a better test for you: contact the maker of your audio component and tell them if they have "ears on their heads" that they will see the "undeniable" sonic benefits that result from using your selected power cable with their component. tell them, based on this "undeniable" evidence that they should replace the "substandard" power cable that they are currently using with the "undeniably" better one that you have discovered. the fact that audio equipment makers are not shipping product using these "upmarket" power cords tell me that the people who actually make audio equipment aren't buying into these assertions. |
Zaikesman, it is a big "if" Paperw8 were to come to your house and listen. I always wonder why any of the Scam police ever buy anything new. |
Paperw8: As you apparently insist on missing my point I suppose there's not much I can do about it, but my original hypothetical to you wasn't about my opinions or perceptions, or even about me in particular. Go back and reread it: I asked how, in your psychological paradigm, you can account for the fact that audiophile behavior doesn't always, or even very often in my experience, conform to your purported stereotype (of being inextricably swayed by factors other than subjective sonic performance).
I'm left to pose the same Socratism that I did earlier in the thread: Namely, which approach -- yours (power cords can't 'work' for a [selective] variety of reasons *other* than actually auditioning some in revealing systems and coming up empty, therefore one can disregard that imperative), or mine (essentially the opposite, i.e., since I can reliably hear them 'work', then a totally explicated formulation for *precisely* why and how they work is distinctly secondary) -- is the more predetermined and possibly prejudicial?
I don't quibble with your subjugate points about value-for-money or questionable advertising practices. (I do however find unconvincing your critique regarding the hypothetical of high-end amplifier manufacturers and power cords.) And I can't even say that I don't sympathize with your position to some degree, since I myself likewise decline to audition the sorts of tweaks that strike *me* as being unrealistically 'magical' or baseless. There's only so much time and resources in life, and each of us has to choose for ourselves what to pursue and what not to.
What I must wonder is, how you would explain it if you came to my house, listened to my system with different power cord substitutions, and heard the correlated sonic effects that I hear? Because I don't see how you could fail to if you have ears on your head. But the happy user of some 'black box' tweak would say the same thing to me, so absent actually doing this test, on (and on!) we go... |
in the world of audio nothing is undeniable.
claims about differences cannot be definitively substantiated without a mathematical proof as knowledge can not come from sensation. the latter is unreliable.
most of the comments so far, are nothing more than bs. |
Paperw8, I appreciate the civility of your post. These are my responses to each:
1) intellectual interest: I guess this debate has been going on for years and has no resolution. Listen or accept EE laws which suggest little difference.
2) personal interest: this is related to the above. Apparently you want measures such as resistance, THD, efficiency, wattage, etc. I would say that is fine, but personally I think our measures leave much to be desired as they fail to assess what matters.
3)general consumer interest: yes, capitalism and advertising does result in every effort being made to sell product. Hype sells! Unless you want to do away with private enterprise, it will always be there. I am sure many would question why you volunteer to save them from advertising or buying what they want. I suppose one could demand double blind tests for everything, but I doubt if there would be much interest and how would you do that for cars, etc.
Frankly, I think you guys are tilting at windmills. |
>>09-08-11: Paperw8
1)intellectual interest:<<
Well you can skip tbg's contributions if that's the case. |
09-07-11: Tbg
Paperw8, why do you care? It is not your money nor your listening. It sounds like you are offended for others, why would that be?
i engage in these discussions for the following reasons: 1)intellectual interest: i sometimes learn stuff from debating others' points of view (that hasn't been the case so much in this discussion, but i do pick up information); 2)personal interest: i actually do want to see better, more reliable, information on audio equipment choices. i actually have gripes about the quality of information in general, not just about cable matters. but my thinking is that by challenging the information out there that it will hopefully result in better information; 3)general consumer interest: there is a lot of bs out there about audio products that is being passed off as information. as i mentioned, audio equipment is often sold by people who know a lot about electronics to people who know little about electronics. that's fertile ground for being taken advantage of. i really think that people are getting snookered out of a lot of money on the basis of questionable claims, and i feel that someone should challenge the bs. |
Paperw8, why do you care? It is not your money nor your listening. It sounds like you are offended for others, why would that be? |
09-07-11: Tbg
Rwwear, no one owes you proof. I doubt seriously if many audiophiles avoid trying different power cords because several people, imbued with the "laws of EE," claim they could make no difference.
let me give you a hypothetical: a person goes to an audio store, spends $50,000 to buy a power amplifier and later concludes: "i'll gladly spend another $2,500 to get a power cord that will make my amplifier sound even better!" i would think that most people hearing that hypothetical would conclude that the buyer was a fool, one who maybe had a bit too much money on his hands. you would think if the buyer discovered the undeniable sonic benefits of this alternative cable, that he would go back to the maker of the amplifier and angrily demand to know why they sold a $50,000 amplifier with a sub-standard power cord. to bring the discussion to the present discussion; if you really are so convinced of the putative benefits of power cords, then you and the rest of the "believers" in this stuff, should be calling the makers of high end audio equipment to account for shipping sub-standard products at super-standard prices. of course, if you go to the makers with these kinds of allegations, you're going to have to substantiate them, but i am not expecting you, or anyone in the "audiophile reviewer" community to initiate such a line of inquiry. the fact that there has been no such inquiry points to reasons to be suspicious of the claims of "dramatic" sonic benefits based on cable/cord selection. let's face it, cable is probably the most lucrative product line in the "audio tweaks" product category. and the thing is, when people are spending tens of thousands of dollars (or more) on audio systems, its easy to drop a few hundred (or thousand) bucks more on "tweaks" because comparatively speaking, it looks like a relatively small amount of money. |
09-07-11: Mrtennis
i think most would agree that many statements made on the discussion forums cannot be proven, because they are opinions, not facts or knowledge.
to a certain extent, it's like trying to prove/disprove the existence of santa claus or the easter bunny. but let's think about this logically: you just spent big money on, say, a power amplifier. you would like to think that the maker put great thought into the design of *every* detail in the amplifier. but then, by a mere change of power cord you discover that they didn't spend time thinking through the detail of supplying a sufficient power cord to enable to amplifier to achieve its peak performance. in other words, you've been gypped! if the maker of that power amplifier did not even show enough care to select the right power cord, what does that suggest about the rest of the system? do you see where this is heading? |
09-07-11: Zaikesman
Paperw8: I can't help but notice that you basically punted on my question. You said you couldn't know what was going in another audionphile's head, so to speak. Well of course, but I didn't ask you that: I asked what explanation you could offer for audiophile *behavior* that contravenes your assumptions about the supposedly confounding effects of presumed psychological factors. Mine was a valid question, which can't be satisfactorily sidestepped in your paradigm by refusing to consider the evidence.
what you offered were *your* opinions and *your* perceptions; both of which are the product of what is going on in your head. i will tell you that observing differences in system performances based on cable selection is not a universal phenomenon. in fact, i watched one commentary about thiel speakers in which the person raved about the speakers but said that she couldn't really tell the difference when the merchant switched cables in the system. you may also want to look at some of the articles cited in posts b rwwear... |
Me: How do you explain the audiophile, such as myself and no doubt just about anyone who has actually tried a variety of power cords and hears differences among them (or any other component for that matter -- power cords are no different from anything else in this regard), who has had the experience of buying something that yes, they hoped would succeed and fulfill their expectations, and yes, paid good money for it, and no, their auditioning wasn't performed double-blind (of course), and yet, wound up NOT preferring the most expensive, or the newest, or the prettiest, or the best-reviewed item? This does happen not-infrequently in the real world...
Paperw8: You're effectively asking me to tell you what is going on in your head, and i can't do that. suffice it to say, and as noted earlier in this thread, this topic is a *highly* controversial one. in general, i have difficulty with stuff which seems to operate by magic. when i read comments about the presumed sonic benefits of power cords, and "tweaks" in general, my reaction is to think that these people should remember to wear their tin foil hats with the shiny side facing outward. in my mind, this stuff is no different than with other controversial topics like the loch ness monster, area 51 ufo theories, and the abominable snowman. Paperw8: I can't help but notice that you basically punted on my question. You said you couldn't know what was going in another audionphile's head, so to speak. Well of course, but I didn't ask you that: I asked what explanation you could offer for audiophile *behavior* that contravenes your assumptions about the supposedly confounding effects of presumed psychological factors. Mine was a valid question, which can't be satisfactorily sidestepped in your paradigm by refusing to consider the evidence. FYI, I am a scientifically-oriented skeptic and don't believe in any of those sorts of 'supernatural phenomena' that you equate with aftermarket power cords. I also don't believe in 'magic' or 'black box' audio tweaks with no apparent or plausible basis or explanation for their operation. But I think you make a fundamental mistake in conflating stuff like 'magic' pucks, pebbles, clocks etc. with upgraded power cords, and that it would be disingenuous to imply that the vastly greater number of audiophiles (and reviewers and manufacturers) who employ aftermarket cords are in the same camp as the much smaller number who use the typically faddish and ephemeral 'magic' tweaks. Contrary to your statement, power cords are actually not at all controversial -- not within the audiophile community, nor outside of it (since most nonaudiophiles not only have no experience with them, they don't even know such a thing exists). The much wider and more enduring acceptance among audiophiles of the efficacy of power cords vs. 'magic' tweaks should really tell you something, becuase unlike your caricature, the majority of audiophiles are in fact reasonably intelligent, scientifically aware rationalists, who aren't alien abductees or conspiracy theorists and don't wear tin hats. It's true. |
i upgraded the power cord on my plasma tv and now the picture is identical to that of a 3d tv. simply amazing and i dont have to wear glasses! i have no proof or science behind it, but i know what i see. i even passed a double ear muffed test 3 times now and passed at 100% everytime. if you dont believe me then i will argue with you because i know it all!! |
No apologies needed, we seem to get a little overwrought about things that really matter little. |
i think most would agree that many statements made on the discussion forums cannot be proven, because they are opinions, not facts or knowledge. |
Rwwear, sorry! I have been in this conversation so many times that I over generalize. I don't believe many of the things that are written either and rather have to test them myself. We I am from the Show me state, Missouri. |
I didn't say anyone owes me proof. But I just don't believe everything I'm told without it. You have proven by they way you interpret what I say that you are not a reliable witness. |
Rwwear, no one owes you proof. I doubt seriously if many audiophiles avoid trying different power cords because several people, imbued with the "laws of EE," claim they could make no difference. |
It's your cause TB. Some just don't believe in it plain and simple. As a matter of fact in the real world hardly anyone believes it. I'm not saying you are lying. I just need proof that I can believe. |
Rwwear, this is old nonsense. Most people ignored Randi's challenge, but one accepted it. Randi set such conditions that no one ever had a chance to take the challenge.
Lissnr, ask yourself why Rwwear and Paperw8 bother to spend so much time and effort at their cause? Why would they care if you try different cables? I have suspicions, but I really don't know or care. |
Wanted to thank the reviewers for identifying themselves.
Best,
Dave |
|
|
Hello all, again. Paperw8, you made the following comment:
"if you read my comments more closely, you will note that i stated that AT MINIMUM, such "evaluations" need to be done in blind testing, where the listener does not know which components are being used, or even whether components have been changed at all from one test to the next. i guarantee you that you would be a lot less sure about the purported "sonic improvements" that you claim to hear if you didn't know what you were listening to from one test to the next."
I have been repeating myself that not only can I accomplish this with 100% repeatable consistent reliability under exactly the circumstances you describe : 'Not knowing when the cables are swapped...completely random...often repeatedly NOT changed, even after implying it 'may' have been...' 100% of the time I can tell and identify cable A or Cable B each and every time. Add to that I'd be confidently willing to bet that many/most people could do exactly the same thing.
So where is the question here? Why is there any doubt about whether powercords make a difference in sound? Comparing a typical stock powercord to a competent aftermarket cord, especially one of the many I have mentioned (just the tip of the iceberg of what's available)is absolutely NOT ambiguous...NOT questionable...NOT uncertain... especially in a reasonably resolving system (and even MORE ESPECIALLY in a HIGHLY resolving system). This post never needed to reach over 4 pages and 200+ responses... I'm simply stating what is so apparent to the majority of the readers of this cable section who have purchased aftermarket powercords and in so doing have significantly improved the sound quality of their systems...using their own hard earned money and without feeling intimidated by any high pressure salespeople...they simply tried it, and believed their own ears!
If anyone wants to discuss "WHY" powercords DO make a difference, then start another thread about it but THIS thread simply wanted to know IF THEY DO make a difference in sound and THAT answer has been stated over 200 responses earlier: YES,indeed, they absolutely do.
DONE. |
09-06-11: Rwwear
I think anyone interested should read this:
http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm#house
remember: shiny side out! |
too much analysis leads to paralysis.
the placebo effect is alive and well.
what difference does it make if powercords make a difference in sound or they don't make any difference in sound.
there is no way to prove, using analytic a priori deductive methods.
so any empirical proof would be based upon statistics or induction.
it has been suggested that a blind test be used to test for differences in the "sound" of power cords.
blind tests do not prove anything.
any statement based upon perception is essentially probabilistic, hence does not prove anything.
all of the efforts to justify that power cords differ in their affect upon a stereo system amount to a philosophical discussion, with no conclusion.
the senses are unreliable.
the only way to deal with this issue is a mathematical proof. |
|
09-06-11: Douglas_schroeder
(poking my nose back in for a moment...)
Paperw8, you do harm to your argument with such illustrations that stretch credibility. I sense you are quite passionate about your position, but you hurt yourself when you suggest...
-That a person be wary of an individual who describes a phenomenon but can't explain it. Doesn't all observation lead to exploration, discovery? Shall we be suspect of all who hear a phenomenon regularly? Perhaps we should be suspect of those who don't?
-Re: Personal Biases - The existence of bias is not a reason for dismissal of a phenomenon. It may influence one's perception, but certainly is not definitive proof against it.
i write as a person who really wishes that there were better, more credible, information available about audio equipment. but the amount of bs that is so frequently proliferated about in the public, hurts the credibility of the industry in general. i appreciate the existence of scientific methods of empirical observation. but that's not what is going on here. here, the problems are that you often have suggestion and anticipation *before* observation. that kind of stuff can color your observations. that doesn't "prove" that the obsrevations are incorrect; but it does make them highly suspect. if you read my comments more closely, you will note that i stated that AT MINIMUM, such "evaluations" need to be done in blind testing, where the listener does not know which components are being used, or even whether components have been changed at all from one test to the next. i guarantee you that you would be a lot less sure about the purported "sonic improvements" that you claim to hear if you didn't know what you were listening to from one test to the next.
09-06-11: Douglas_schroeder
I have had the pleasure of having several audiophiles, some industry professionals, in my room who started with a negative bias against cables, especially power cables. It has been pure joy to demonstrate simply the efficacy of switching power cords. To a man (and one man's wife as well!) they have been impressed, i.e. they have heard the difference - and heard it immediately. You assume a positive bias, but simple comparisons in a good audio system has been able to overcome negative bias in people.
I enjoy their shocked expressions and struggle to find explanations. :)
i don't know what your test methods were, but if you went into it with the intention of "proving" that power cables did make a difference, i suspect that you tended to set up the test to bias toward the result that you were seeking to get. in general, this kind of testing is highly unreliable: i'll listen to one component, and then while repeating the test, and even when playing the same piece of music, i have to try to remember exactly how it sounded a few minutes earlier. it is an, at best, unreliable means of testing, and one in which the bias is to think that the most recent hearing is the best one. so if, in your testing, you used the "upgraded" power cord last, then i would suspect that you biased the results. that is why you have to do repeated blind testing in random sequence (including tests where you don't make any changes).
09-06-11: Douglas_schroeder
-You mention Pseudo-science and "...stuff which seems to operate by magic." Surely you are aware of the many persons in the cable industry who have engineering/electronics education? Surely you know about research white papers, discussions on websites of work with dielectric, conductor size/geometry and gauge? I'm not speaking of networked cables here as they are a special case, but of straight wire cable manufacturers. It is misinformed of you to state that there is no attempt at science/research behind cable manufacturing. Now, you may wish to disdain it, that's your choice. But to pretend it doesn't exist is inaccurate. If you wish to read some reviews with an eye toward the design element of cables I suggest you find my cable reviews on Dagogo.com.
i don't doubt that the makers of audio gear are knowledgeable about electronics. but i also know that these are people who are out to make a buck by selling their wares to people who largely *don't* know a lot about electronics. let me give you an example - siltech makes high end cables, i mean, these guys make speaker cables that cost over $30,000. when i read what they had to say about their products, there were comments about how they designed their cables to over come the effects of signal distortion that can occur as a signal travels through cable. what the guy was invoking was a transmission line model of a cable. technically, that is correct, a cable can indeed be modelled as equivalent to a series of capacitors and inductors in a transmission line model. the problem is that the transmission line model is typically only relevant at microwave frequencies; to invoke such a model for signals in the range of audio frequencies is ridiculous. so basically, these guys are trying to convince you to spend thousands of dollars on cable that you can get at radio shack for $0.40/foot. that said, the siltech cables (connectors, sheaths and all) look a lot more impressive than the stuff at radio shack. |
Chad, it was inevitable that you make this decision. Now you face the nearly countless alternatives. Few of us have heard more than a handful of what is available. Friends with good ears are your best recourse. Or if you have a true audiophile dealer nearby give what he sells a listen. View it as a quest not as a task. |
Chad, you do have the right perspective; give it a shot to see if it's meritorious. Unlike some extreme sports there's very little permanent scarring. ;)
But I would urge you to work with at least 2 or three cables of one manufacturer (i.e. 2 or 3 power cords, or 2 sets of interconnects, etc). Trying one cord at a time is less evidential; like working with a canal system and only altering 1/5 of it. Some people have tried one cord and not heard much difference, then wrongly concluded that "cables don't matter". If you take a minimalist approach to it you shouldn't expect maximum results. A network of cables is influenced proportionately to how much you change the network, and similarly its influence upon the system.
Liguy from this discussion is reconsidering power cables since it appears he tried extremely similar cords. I admire his openness to take another look/test.
It will be enjoyable to read about your experience. |
Chad329,
I think you have the right perspective.
Good luck! |
Ok, I see that the can of worms has settled a bit. From my gathering and speaking to a local hi fi shop here, the consensus is that power cords can make a difference depending on the system and cord being used. I'll leave it at that and will try one in the near future to gauge for myself.
Thank you for those that chimed in with their personal experience. I will post feedback once I get to experiment on my own. |
(poking my nose back in for a moment...)
Paperw8, you do harm to your argument with such illustrations that stretch credibility. I sense you are quite passionate about your position, but you hurt yourself when you suggest...
-That a person be wary of an individual who describes a phenomenon but can't explain it. Doesn't all observation lead to exploration, discovery? Shall we be suspect of all who hear a phenomenon regularly? Perhaps we should be suspect of those who don't?
-Re: Personal Biases - The existence of bias is not a reason for dismissal of a phenomenon. It may influence one's perception, but certainly is not definitive proof against it.
I have had the pleasure of having several audiophiles, some industry professionals, in my room who started with a negative bias against cables, especially power cables. It has been pure joy to demonstrate simply the efficacy of switching power cords. To a man (and one man's wife as well!) they have been impressed, i.e. they have heard the difference - and heard it immediately. You assume a positive bias, but simple comparisons in a good audio system has been able to overcome negative bias in people.
I enjoy their shocked expressions and struggle to find explanations. :)
-You mention Pseudo-science and "...stuff which seems to operate by magic." Surely you are aware of the many persons in the cable industry who have engineering/electronics education? Surely you know about research white papers, discussions on websites of work with dielectric, conductor size/geometry and gauge? I'm not speaking of networked cables here as they are a special case, but of straight wire cable manufacturers. It is misinformed of you to state that there is no attempt at science/research behind cable manufacturing. Now, you may wish to disdain it, that's your choice. But to pretend it doesn't exist is inaccurate. If you wish to read some reviews with an eye toward the design element of cables I suggest you find my cable reviews on Dagogo.com.
Finally, you badly overreach with your Nessy, Alien, Yeti illustration. It actually harms your argument. Whereas one can trek the world and never see hide nor hair of these others, cables are a click away for anyone to solve the Great Cable Mystery! :)
|
Paperw8, thank you for your opinion. |
09-04-11: Zaikesman
Paperw8: How do you explain the audiophile, such as myself and no doubt just about anyone who has actually tried a variety of power cords and hears differences among them (or any other component for that matter -- power cords are no different from anything else in this regard), who has had the experience of buying something that yes, they hoped would succeed and fulfill their expectations, and yes, paid good money for it, and no, their auditioning wasn't performed double-blind (of course), and yet, wound up NOT preferring the most expensive, or the newest, or the prettiest, or the best-reviewed item? This does happen not-infrequently in the real world...
you're effectively asking me to tell you what is going on in your head, and i can't do that. suffice it to say, and as noted earlier in this thread, this topic is a *highly* controversial one. in general, i have difficulty with stuff which seems to operate by magic. when i read comments about the presumed sonic benefits of power cords, and "tweaks" in general, my reaction is to think that these people should remember to wear their tin foil hats with the shiny side facing outward. in my mind, this stuff is no different than with other controversial topics like the loch ness monster, area 51 ufo theories, and the abominable snowman. |
Btselect - that's true, power is very important but when you're in drag racing you don't care how smooth is the ride. There is plenty of very dynamic systems that sound horrible in spite of super outlets, dedicated lines etc. I do still agree about benefits of basics (good power delivery) but it is only a (necessary) part of the picture. |
Just another point of view, a key question is why so many different points of views and results. The first step in building a stereo or home theatre system should be the electrical, the level of electrical would determine what type of components you should buy and the level of performance one CAN achieve.
Here's my example: in drag racing the type of fuel determines the potential of performance, so the nitro fueled cars set the standard, you won't say your street legal unleaded fueled car is top dog. What I see in this hobby is people with all levels of gear claiming to have reached that 4 second
mark, with unleaded gas. This is not a plug and play hobby, you may be able to tune a Toyota but a nitro fueled car? |
Zaikesman, let us consider what might "qualify" someone as a reviewer. Would it be an EE degree, years of experience in audio, experience as a dealer in audio, knowing many manufacturers, being wealthy enough to not be bought to give a good review to get the component at a good price, being articulate, hearing well in tests, etc.?
When I entered audio in the late 50s, there were few manufactures and JG Holt listened to them and said what he thought without any influence of advertising on his judgment. Even in small towns there were dealers who were more interested in the best audio than making a lot of money and who would get products in where you could go a give a listening. All of this is gone now. Even were I to travel over a hundred miles, I could not hear a comparison of products that interest me. Even going to shows where such products might be in separate rooms allows no such comparison.
What becomes very important now is opinions of others about these products and hopefully a comparison with two that interest us. I think today that reviewers now serve to replace going to a dealer and listening and hopefully hearing a comparison between two of the few available products that interest us. I still remember hearing a comparison between Crown and SAE amps.
I seek always to be aware that others might have different circumstances, tastes, and rooms than I do. I view my reviews as personal experiences, with more substance than just saying "this product blows my mind" or "sucks."
Two of my undergraduate majors were EE and physics. I always had trouble with these two as they often contradicted each other. One focuses on building things that work and the other on exploring how things work. I am constantly aware of my not understanding why quartz some places helps, in others does nothing, and in yet others greatly hurts the sound. There is no theory as to why this happens. There are many, many instances of this, in my experience. All that I can conclude when reviewing such products is that in my system they are very important.
Of course, ethics are very important. In the old days, if a dealer had both products that interested you and you heard one that you liked, there were no ethical concerns other than whether he would honor the warranty. I have no real solution to whether you should trust a reviewer. |
Dave: That's a very interesting question you asked. I am quite frankly surprised by the answers.
(It would be too politically incorrect for me to explicitly say why -- although in another sense I guess I shouldn't be surprised at all, since I myself was once asked if I would be interested in reviewing for one of the publications mentioned above, by its editor. I wasn't, but also declined because I didn't feel that I was qualified: not as an audiophile, nor technically, nor as a writer.) |
Dave, I write for StereoTimes. I did write for Dagogo and for SoundStage. Let's just say they didn't work out. I am the only Norm on StereoTimes list. |
hi dave:
i write for audiophilia.com. if you do a search on my name, you will find a variety of essays that are not reviews.
if you read any review i would appreciate feedback as to your attitude regarding my reviewing style. |
Gentlemen;
Some of you have alluded through your posts you write reviews. I take this to mean you write professionally for a periodical or site?
If so, I wonder, is it inappropriate to ask you to identify yourselves and where one could find your reviews?
I for one would be interested in reading your points of view on other subjects besides power cords.
Best,
Dave |
Paperw8: How do you explain the audiophile, such as myself and no doubt just about anyone who has actually tried a variety of power cords and hears differences among them (or any other component for that matter -- power cords are no different from anything else in this regard), who has had the experience of buying something that yes, they hoped would succeed and fulfill their expectations, and yes, paid good money for it, and no, their auditioning wasn't performed double-blind (of course), and yet, wound up NOT preferring the most expensive, or the newest, or the prettiest, or the best-reviewed item? This does happen not-infrequently in the real world... |
hi doug:
if, as you say, i have directly stated that a component has a sound, i was in error. what i meant to say wae that the stereo system had a sound, when a particular component was part of that stereo system.
p agree there is nothing more to say.
if perchance you should read one my reviews, i am describing the sound of a stereo system with the review sample(s) substituted for other components.
i always describe what i am hearing, not the sound of a component. |
Paperw8:
Your paragraph number three describes exactly what I was alluding to in my post. You said it well.
Best,
Dave |
Original Question: "Do powercords make a difference in sound?"
True answer (as I have repeatedly stated and already proven scientifically in 100% of my extensive listening tests)
YES they do make consistent and often very obvious differences.
If YOU can't tell then the likely cause is either a very "Low-fi" poorly resolving system or "Low-fi" poorly resolving ears.
Next question?/Thread?
|
I missed this thread. You could add me to the third camp. Almarg provided excellent reasoning as to what it's about.
As far as the OP of this thread, if you want too see if you get any benefit, try one on a returnable basis. While comparing, have a friend change them without your knowledge of what cord is being used, IOW a true blind test (out of sight). I don't think a blind test done on a strange system, and strange in a strange environment is accurate. That way you'll actually know if it sounds better without having any influence as to someone telling you it will, or will not sound better. Being that this is in your own system, and home, it will be the most fair. |
