Help with my University Research Project

I wonder how you intend to deal with issues that very much seem to influence our subjective perceptions of cables and electronics, but which are not related to the areas which you intend to study objectively. Two which come to mind are reproduction of soundstage and reproduction of dynamics. There may be others, such as detail reproduction, but with that one it is not quite as clear that it has nothing to do with spectral balance. I think this brings out the issues related to "objective" testing vs. subjective analysis. Even the so-called "objective" testing is subjective because, even if we had perfect instruments for measuring things objectively, what we choose to measure (and not to measure) make the test subjective. Unfortunately, in subjective analysis, such as listener evaluation, these factors, both those which are understood and those which have yet to be, all contribute to our subjective perception.

It seems that your topic has to do with the harmonic effect of cables in high-end systems (you like to use the word "distortion" as an ordinary-language stand-in for the mathematical concept of harmonics, but I prefer harmonics, despite the math). My question to you is the following: why stop at cable-component interaction? Because the relative balance of a system's harmonics are important to its sound, the frequency response of cartridges, amplifiers, speakers and all other elements in the signal path (including wires, connectors, transistors, tubes, capacitors, resistors, chips, etc. even fuses) can have an effect on the timbre or harmonic balance of the sound. Of course cables too can be used to vary the timbre of a system, thus changing the subjective effect on the listener. The significance of cables to our perception of tone quality is one of the most hotly debated topics at audiogon with numerous threads worth searching through (some are maybe worth as much as those "science journals" you plan to read). For discovering the "generallly accepted extremes" of cable/component interaction, you might do a statistical analysis of the words found in individual posts to describe the sound of specific cables with specific components (i.e. how many times does the phrase "powerful, punchy bass" appear in descriptions of Krell model "?" with XLO model "?").

Your project sounds most interesting. I do hope you can carry it off with sound research methodology. I suspect that what you intend to do will be far more difficult than what you now think likely.

So many of the effects of component changes are subtle and most difficult to describe in any rational way: hence the strange pseudo poetic language which suffuses most reviews of equipment in the high end press.

I certainly do not believe that most audiophiles can be dismissed as deluded fools, the victims of self-fulfilling prophecies. I do believe that they are hearing genuine, real differences that are consistent and which do affect the pleasure derived from the reproduction of music. However, I'm not sure that these subtleties can easily be correlated with attributes measurable by test equipment. In fact, I’m sure that they cannot.

Therefore, it is likely that your survey will have to take for its raw material the sum total of subjective opinions offered by a group of listeners. How you will be able to tabulate such subjective responses according to an objective standard is beyond me. Frankly, I'm not sure it's even possible.

However, in this sense the appreciation of reproduced sound differs little from other types of connoisseurship such as those involved in the evaluation of fine art, wine, automobiles, sail boats, sports equipment, architecture, computer software or virtually any product, device, or system enjoyed by us human beings. How many of these may be adequately described by a small set of objective measurements? Actually, none of them can. The top speed attainable by a car certainly does not fully describe it’s success as a racing vehicle. Also, its ability to accelerate, its handling capabilities, its braking power, its road holding ability, and many other factors greatly influence how adequate it is to its purpose. Nor can most of those factors be easily quantified.

That is why people who review and write about such things as cars, sailboats, wines, etc. necessarily resort to metaphor, analogy, and other forms of “imprecise” poetic language. Interestingly reviewers of those things are not reviled for stating opinions which they cannot back up with tests or measurements. It seems that only in the world of high end audio is there the expectation that the complexities of evaluation ought to be reducable to a few measurements.

Also it is clear that the ability to evaluate and discern subtle differences in any human endeavor is learned and that it improves with practice and experience. The choices made by naïve observers about anything are always inferior to those made by knowledgeable consumers. Just think of how a six year old would decorate a house and how a grown up with taste would do the same. Or even in our own lives, we can easily look back at the many things that impressed us as adolescents and which now embarrass us to come to the conclusion that opinions based on experience and knowledge are far superior to naïve impulse.

So I advise you to be careful in your selection of participants and to attempt as best you can, to limit it to those who have revealed an adequate level of discernment.

I’m a graduate of Miami myself (class of ’69) and wish you well in your project.

Sincerely,
László Bencze

PLease read all this post carefully. It is a little long but I hope it clarifies some things and brings people up to speed with our currrent state.

I had thought this thread was dead... until I can complete my initial research and can post the results. But recently I have recieved a few emails (one about a month ago and another yesterday) and have noticed a few new posts as well. I think that I should restate a few things. Not because I wish to argue any points, the recent posts and emails are completely correct, but because I would like to clarify some things that we hope to accomplish.

I will not be using any sort of "human compass" test measurements initially. First I would like to establish a reference recording. Then I will play this recording from source (computer) through the cables in question and then into the measurement computer. If there is a difference then it will show up. I might not be able to say what that will correspond to if it were played through a "perfect amp" and "perfect speaker" and in a "perfect room", but I will be able to say that there is a difference.

Of course all of that is an oversimplification. However we believe that any time problems, or any frequency or harmonic anomolies will be detected. Again, what this translates into or how to really quantify the anomolies is not our initial goal. If it turns out that we can assign a set of characteristic anomolies to a certain cable (and our preliminary stuff says YES) then we will begin to set up a very controlled environment in which to go deeper. Of course there is always the possibility that a cable only acts the way it does when connected to Levinson or Rotel stuff and not with VTL or Spectral. If that is the reality of the situation... and we suspect it is, then this research will not validate it. What it will do is prove that cables can impart changes.

Our project is shaping into this:

We will use all Mark Levinson gear (No.39 CD, No 380 Pre, and a 336 Amp) going to Thiel speakers in a rectangular room. We will then use some friends as subjects. Again it is not our goal identify what cable produces the widest or most accurate soundstage but only that it does indeed change it. I think that anyone shoud be able to tell, on well recorded music, if there is big enough change.

Of course none of this will help anyone on this board when deciding on cable purchases. What we hope it will do is prove that it can be done. What we think needs to happen (and what we know never will) is that there needs to be some sort of standard test for all cables. Maybe this won't be "hey this cable gives a 2.3 whosawhatchit soundstage". But it might be something like this. "hey this gives a 2.3 whosawatchit which means it might cause timing or harmonic anomolies with equipment in this blah blah blah arbitrary catagory"

We also should mention that we in now way believe that we are doing research that has not been done before. What we do believe is that it has not been published. It is probably done once a day for the last 10 years in research labs at Madrigal or Spectral or TagMcLaren etc. etc.

So in summation, we will first look at a few cables to determine their reaction with a reference system. We will then try and document any measurable changes the cables impart on the system. The last stage will be to try and describe (in very, very basic audiophile terms) what those changes might be. If this can be done then we will have answered a question that many industry engineers already know. Will this mean that Joe Bloe with his $10,000 cables really does hear a better soundstage than Joe Schmoe does with his RatShack stuff... NO. But it will give some validity to these types of claims "I noticed a difference between cable A and Cable B"

Trthomp,

I will continue to follow this thread with great interest. I look forward to your results no matter the outcome. I don't know if you plan on noting differences in cables depending on their use of materials or design, but no matter your findings will be interesting.

Keep up the good work!