2. cables
  3. 146725-20253

How I would measure cables

Hi everyone,
There’s been a lot of talk about "science" and cables. To me it sounds a lot like free energy, and cold fusion scams. With few exceptions, they invoke a lot of physics, without ever tying it back down to actual results. Fancy words, and lots of them.
In the fusion/energy camps this has become so common that they use a very simple method to find fraud. Like the discovery of the Enron scam, we have learned to compare input to output. Enron was first discovered to be a fraud by simply looking at the income and comparing it to claimed money generated. And oh how they howled that we just didn’t understand the business model.

So, with perpetual motion, fusion, dark matter conversion generators, and what have you, they have a simple test. Compare energy in versus energy out over time. The funny thing is, if any of these things actually worked, you’d think they’d make money by selling energy, but they don’t, they make money by getting you to invest or buy their equipment.

Anyway, point is, we live at a time where 96kHz/32 bit AD converters are common place, and commonly used in signal testing and analysis. If _ANY_ cable actually was worth high prices it would be super simple to test the output. For instance, record the signal at the speaker terminals for an entire performance you believe shows how good cable A vs. cable B is. Then go in and locate the difference. Perhaps it is frequency, perhaps timing, perhaps amplitude. It’s a lot of data for the 1970s, but all this would fit on anyone’s laptop now and be relatively easy to analyze.

I don’t have the time or energy to do this, anymore than I have the time to measure the power of the latest perpetual motion gizmo, however, this is affordable and practical for most manufacturers to accomplish. That none have done this, except a little done by Analysis Plus (with severe constraints) is why I will always remain somewhat with the skeptics and the "that’s way too expensive for a cable" camp.

So my point is, if you make cables you think do something cool, and worthwhile, I encourage you to undertake this type of basic research, maybe even define how testing should be done so others can follow and we can compare. For the rest of the world, I strongly encourage skepticism and to ask yourself repeatedly if what you are hearing really is worth the cost, or whether the same amount of money is better spent on a vacation.

If you want things which are clearly better than cables, room acoustic treatments by far are much easier to hear, prove they work, and end up with reliably great results.

Best,

E
erik_squires

Showing 7 responses by cleeds

cleeds
6,117 posts
 

erik_squires
... this all assumes cables make a difference ...
I think many of us agree with you that they do:
To be clear: I am on the "cables make a small difference" camp.
Whether a difference is really "small" or not is subjective, as whether a difference is worth its cost is also subjective.
OK, we couldn’t measure this conclusively in 1970s.
Is that true?
So.... can we now?
I’m waiting for those who are interested to try, and then report back with what they’ve found.

One thing that strikes me odd about those who seek measurements of things such as cables is that they don’t seem to be interested in conducting valid, scientific, double-blind listening tests. The protocols for conducting such tests are pretty well established, whereas the methods needed to properly measure cables seem to be a topic of some debate. In that way, the listening test seems to be a more practical next step in this study.

I’m among those who think the results of listening tests are often inconclusive or ambiguous. Still, they can be a good place to start.
cleeds
6,117 posts
 
prof
I have never made such a demand. And in his OP, neither did Erik, so that's a strawman.
When ou cite a "burden of proof," you essentially make a demand, just as Erik does here:

erik_squires
If you make claims about speaker cables, prove it.

cleeds
6,117 posts
 
erik_squires
Maybe what I should do is measure a bunch of cables with brand new metrics ...
Yessss! Please do! Please share with us how you measured the cables and what the results were.
cleeds
6,117 posts
 
prof

cleeds is as usual trying to shift the burden of proof.
That’s silly. This is a hobbyist’s group. Users here are free to post their observations and no "burden of proof" exists at all. Those who desire such "proof," or who seek scientific tests, are free to conduct their own research. I’ve been part of such testing more than once - and the results have not always been predictable. So while I encourage the testing, and enjoy reading about valid scientific listening tests, I’d never demand that others conduct such tests, especially in a group such as this.
cleeds
6,117 posts
 
erik_squires
If you make claims about speaker cables, prove it.
Whatever claims I have made about speaker cables have been proven to my satisfaction. You are free to do the same. Or, good luck getting others to do your work for you.
I'm also saying that the reasons we can't is that we are hearing things to subtle to be measured. 
But you state in your OP that it would be "super easy"  to do these tests. So which is it? Super easy? Or too subtle to measure?
cleeds
6,117 posts
 
erik_squires

... since it is their product, the onus is on them, not me, the consumer, to do their testing for them.
No, you're asking others to do the tests you desire, but "don’t have the time or energy to do" yourself, even though you think those tests would be "super simple" to conduct. Sorry, but no one has any burden to conduct testing to your satisfaction.
... You should be upset cable manufacturers and reviewers won't measure them ...
We should be upset because you tell us to be upset? That's absurd.
cleeds
6,117 posts
 

erik_squires

There’s been a lot of talk about "science" and cables. To me it sounds a lot like free energy, and cold fusion scams. With few exceptions, they invoke a lot of physics, without ever tying it back down to actual results. Fancy words, and lots of them ... If any cable actually was worthwhile, it would be super simple to test the output ... I don’t have the time or energy to do this ... if you have cables you think do something cool, and worthwhile, I encourage you to undertake this type of basic research, maybe even define how testing should be done so others can follow and we can compare ...
Here’s another example of someone arguing for objective testing of things such as cables, but refusing to do the work themselves - even though they insist it would be "super simple" to do it. After all, it’s just "basic research." Why do they reserve the chore for those who are already happy with the choices they’ve made?

Oddly, Erik titled this thread, "How I would measure cables." But he won't.
... ask yourself repeatedly if what you are hearing really is worth the cost, or whether the same amount of money is better spent on a vacation.
Money spent on a vacation is gone forever. Money spent on a cable can always be recovered - at least in part - on the used market. So there’s no comparing the value between the two.
More to discover