(Via Gizmodo) So it looks like the gauntlet's been thrown down (again). Backed up this time by, apparently, *presses pinkie to corner of mouth* one million dollars...
you are correct on the need for multiple tests. if we were not separated by the atlantic ocean, we could design an experiment to be performed , say 50 times. that way, i could clean your pocket of most of your waging money.
you also raise the question of reliability of perception. the notion that one can be confident of one's perceptions may be open to question. anytime we hear a difference based upon sense perception, we may not always perceive such a difference over multiple repititions. so you could apply your logic to other components as well.
as a practical manner, there is a risk when purchasing components. we may deicde we don't like its presentation after some period of time, evn though we may have auditioned the component for 30 days prior to purchase.
one cannot be certain of one's perceptions. they are a lot like opinions. they are probably true and probably false, and it is difficult to test them.
Brizonbiovizier, I buy on belief as do you. Beware that it is not just significance, it is statistical significance as in is it possible that our random sample came from a population where there was no relationship between variables. What you are talking about is that it is very improbable, not that it is statistically significant, much less meaningfully significant.
I agree with you that room treatment is often neglected, but I certainly would not include digital correction for the room in what needs to be done.
Why do you use expensive connectors on you cables? How do you know they make a difference? You use cables because they were provided and claim cables make no difference without any observations to backup that conviction. This is quite contrary to the scientific method. One seeks a theory that accounts for the observations rather than avoiding observations because they are contrary to the theory.
Mr tennis. Actually that is not true it takes multiple tests subject to statistical significance as someone can can produce a random guess that gets better than the pure chance odds correct. You have to look at the distribution of results, the number of tests and subjects etc to determine if a conclusion is significant.
TBG. But what you like - but you cant claim it exists without proof. Otherwise it is belief and not fact.
The main point = even if cables did make a difference (unlikely) then it is so small that spending the difference elsewhere will make orders of magnitude more difference regardless of system cost. Especially when room treatment is often completely neglected in these systems!
Shadorne, I certainly have known people who buy equipment given its manufacturer's name or because of bells and whistles, but most I know are indifferent to this, at least as I judge the appearance of their gear.
I have no objections whatsoever to people comparing gear behind a curtain, but I think DBT's 30 sec. exposures are invalid.
Finally, very little medical research deals with placebos. That there is centers on evaluating new drugs. Most medical research is simple statistical analyses looking focusing on what contributes to those having a disease.
brizonbovizier is fortunate he lives in england. otherwise i would be ready to submit to a blind test, with two pair of cables of my choice and a stereo system of my choice, to prove him wrong about cable differences.
however, is perception reality ?
if a difference is not heard does that mean that all cables sound the same ? does such a position apply to all phenomena ?
it is possibles that there are differneces which cannot be perceived. that does not mean they do not exist.
Brizonbiovizier's point about sighted tests is an important one.
If you take away the visual cues then much of the fanciful amazing properties of one cable versus another disappear as Mike Lavigne found out (much to his credit for doing a blind test and advancing his understanding of the true magnitude of cable differences, which is ever so small).
Those spending $1000 to $7000 or more on speaker cables would do well to conduct some blind tests and put their own convictions to the test (wife or friend can help). I assure you that many of you will be just as surprised as Mike Lavigne was.
As for those spending $50 to $200 cables it hardly seems worth the bother to go to blind tests or trying to show others that what they hear is influenced by what they see.
BTW- Absolutely Nobody is immune from visual cues or rave reviews that predilect our thinking...we ALL suffer from this. I suffer from it with ATC speakers...I read about all those mastering engineers, grammys and prestigious studios and I am predilected to think ATC must be something special. They do sound nice no doubt. A bit too forward sounding for some and I respect those who feel that way because there are so many great speakers out there. I know for sure that I am influenced by their user list and AES participation and AES papers with regard to my respect for their quality - it ain't purely what I hear. This is why all serious medical research involves placebos.
Brizonbiovizier, no one needs to prove anything to someone else. We all make our own buying decisions. I my case I buy what I think sounds good. Why would you think that someone needs to prove anything to you?
Tbg, I knew there was someone making ribbon SCs. It is convergent evolution. There was a reason why I used Saran wrap. It touches the copper only in a few places, being very baggy. I knew that was important due to listening tests. The wide ribbon, on the other hand, was revelatory.
i would like to propose an experiment. unfortunately you and i are thousands of miles apart.
i would like to demonstrate that i can discern differences between two cables. remember, all it takes is one double blind test to disprove the null hypothesis.
I use Brystons cable loom for the connections between the amps crossover and speakers. It was supplied all in. The rest is balanced star quad cable with high quality neutrik connectors. £50 for 3m pairs or blue jeans cables balanced also for about £20 for a metre pair. Probably 90% of the cost of each is connectors.
Why do I say cables make no difference? because there is no theoretical or experimental evidence to support any thing other than LCR shielding and earthing affecting the interface of two components via cable. In scientific process the onus on the pro-cable believers to provide evidence. Proof positive.
I must say that I cannot understand how someone who says all cables sound alike picks cables.
Muralman1, the Mikro-Omega top interconnects have been using very thin ribbons with a clear plastic surrounds for at least ten years. They sound very neutral. Omega Mikro firmly believes in as little insulation as possible. The were the originators of ribbon power cords. They also strongly believe in designing with awareness of the direction of the wire or ribbon draw.
Hi Shadorne, you just have to hear what I got. When I was using big expensive conventional amps, dielectric noise must have been there, only I could not hear it. That is because all conventional amps I have ever heard contribute too much noise themselves for any finer distortion to get through.
BTW It's not just me that have found naked wires do best. Speltz's magnet wire has quite the following.
Do you really think I can sell cables with Saran Wrap, or bubble wrap insulation?
My ribbon SCs are featured at my system page. There are two companies that already sell ribbon connectors, and SCs.
I have monos, which I turned around backwards backing them up to the speaker terminals. That allows for very short SCs. I believe that is very important. My ICs are long. I have no prediction on how a thin ribbon will do over long distances.
What I am saying here is not to make bravado claims for my SCs, but to underline the startling facts I have found about the cable industry. Paul Speltz has already burst the big cable maker's bubble by introducing their Anti-Cable. I just took that idea and tried it with ribbons.
Now, to really go out on a limb.
Only my positive lead is copper. The negative is plain old aluminum foil. The reason for this is on my speakers, the first five feet of the return is aluminum foil. the last foot won't do any more harm than the first five. Being that the charge carried out is going to be grounded, no harm can be done to it anyway.
And on my system, every cable, regardless of price, will sound no better, and almost all worse than what I have, short thin ribbon SCs. There is no blind test necessary. Loud discordant distortion is easy to verify.
That is because the ones I have tried followed a pattern. The more fancy boxes or insulation the cables are buried in the more the signal suffers.
With simple exceptions, I guess I agree with Brizonbiovizier for the most part.
what evidence do you have that all cables sound the same ? as you know, you can't prove a hypothesis only disprove it. if your hypothesis is that there exists no difference bwteen the sound of cables, you would have to test all combinations of cable. if you tested say, 100 pairs of interconnects and ecah test failed to show that there was a difference between two pair of cable, that would not prove that all cable sounds the same. you hafve made a very unscientific and unsustainable statement. certainly you are entitlee to your opinion. all i would have to do would be to select two pair of interconnect, a stereo system, several recordings and perform a double blind test and fail to support your hypothesis. i bet i can do that.
This thread makes no sense. The failure of anyone to accept the Randi challenge shows nothing except the inability to accept the methodology of the test. The fact that both sides think the method determines the result to me at least, means that the method, not whether there are differences among cables is all that is in question. As such, nothing will ever be proven or disproven.
Brizon, If what you say is true, I would think that you have your system wired with the absolutely cheapest cabling. If you are not using the absolutely cheapest cables why not since they all sound the same? What cables are you using?
As no audible difference exists between cables (which does not relate to LCR and it's interaction with components and then only in the most extreme of circumstances - passive preamp etc) then randis money is quite safe.
Comments regarding people making sighted preferences in their own systems are irrelevant - in unsighted tests these preferences disappear as they do not exist and are merely a function of the imagination of the observer during sighted tests. Cables are susceptible to this methodology and no amount of excuses by enraged cable fans will change that.
i really do not have the facility to conduct a blind test, unless one of the intrepid audiogon members wishes to pay me a visit and conduct the experiment.
i have specific sonic objectives. if the cable furthers those objectives, i will be favorably inclined. if i prefer the cable to my reference interconnect it will be an accomplishment.
the question for me will be, do i want to purchase the cable ?
I read on a Headfi forum thread that Pear Cable has decided not to participate in Mr. Randi's challenge, and has backed out. Michael Fremer has stated that he is still willing to participate using his reference cables, but Mr. Randi has now backed out as well. What gives?
I think what the results of the cable tests show is despite the hyperbole of audiophile language the sonic differences are fairly subtle. Based upon reviews, both professional and others, it's easy to assume that the sonic differences between two well designed components is measured in astronomical units. That's just not the case. Even two diametrically opposed designs, say a 300B tube amp vs. a solid state "digital" amp really don't sound very different when matched to appropriate speaker loads. As audiophiles we tend to emphasize the minor differences as opposed to seeing the overwhelming essential sameness in various designs.
Wow, the write-up of the Mike L listening test is excellent. Makes me wonder what it would be like to run a similar test for other components, ones we are more confident make a big difference, such as phono cartridges or speakers. Would be harder to execute and level-matching would be critical. It seems to me that it's worth spending some time with Shadorne's contention that speaker cables have minimal impact. If that's true, as the Mike L test suggests, then the same test should yield different results for transducers and presumably amplifiers. Seems to me that would help lend some credibility to the testing procedure.
Do you plan to conduct a blind test like Mike Lavigne?
It would be interesting to get your impression.
Or do you accept the cable manufacturers logic that 300 hours of cable break in (synergy with the other equipment etc.) is required to hear differences and that once you disconnect a cable it is back to square one for that cable (so that no A/B test can ever work)?
BTW - aren't these cyrogenically treated (you know stress relieved a la Ed Meitners' discovery that cables "resonate" with a characteristic Q)
This ain't Randi and no million dollars at stake but kudos goes to Mike L. who bravely tested some Opus MM versus Monster and was unable to tell the difference in a fair but rather "crude" test that required several minutes to change cables each time on his stupendous system.
...the test says nothing more than it was difficult to hear a difference with that particular setup but it does lend credence to the idea that cable differences are subtle.
Leica man, I can demonstrate exactly that such insulations cause distortion. The distortion is not something of a different taste, as in coke vs. pepsi. It is rather drinking the coke from a frothy glass, getting just coke fizz, and a foamless class getting nothing but the sweet tasty coke.
naked cables compared to rubber or plastic or leather
Does the blindfold also need to be made from these materials? If so how will the test subject be able to communicate his or her opinion with a ball gag in their mouth?
I'm with Muralman1. I agree that these blindfolded reviewers should be able to distinguish uninhibited signals through naked cables compared to rubber or plastic or leather. I just have a hard time visualizing it.
since you have no knowledge of a recording, your method of detecting distortion is subjective, hence opinion, which is subject to disagreement.
if you insist on using the term "better", it must be quantitative in nature, hence some kind of objective measurement. perhaps you can use white noise and a spectral analyzer.
Better in my book is signal uninhibited, the closest to the original performance. In my perfect world I would insist on the purest form of recording to play back. Distortion should then be easy to single out.
You can parade the most expensive speaker cables through my system, and before you hook them up I can accurately tell you whether they will be contenders or failures.
If the system used was the most revealing system in the world. and Randi has their 99.9% pure naked cable, and the lengths are kept very short, my money is solidly on Randi. Remember, the competing cable must sound better, not different.
On the other hand, if Randi is using Radio Shack plastic wrapped copper cable, It may be enough to impart dielectric static degrading the signal. That can be bettered.
Carl109, if you were to take say 10 of the cables that audiophiles revere plus one bought from Radio Shack and test them as you propose and find no differences even with the most accurate measurement instruments we have, what would you conclude? I would think there are but two alternatives. Either there are no differences or the measurement lack necessary precision or focus on the wrong things.
While I do think I have to rely on what I hear, I agree with you that tests such as Randi proposes are invalid measures of what we want in realistic music reproduction.
The only way $1M can be won is if the cables are tested scientifically, using a tone generator and oscilloscope, to feed a signal in one end and measure how perfectly that signal arrives at the other end. A listening test will never work due to the subjective way we listen to music, and the simple fact that a component that sounds better to one person will sound worse to the next. No two listeners can ever hear exactly the same thing due to our ears and brain differences.
Few audio enthusiasts would doubt that good quality copper/silver cable with properly machined terminations will "improve" a system's accuracy. The true question is: at what price point does that improvement level off, rendering any more cash a simple waste? That's what Randi is getting at, the fact that a $7000 cable is not going to give a 100 fold improvement over a $70 cable, and may not even display any improvement at all.
Mrtennis, Betting, like other forms of gambling, is a fool's game. I don't gamble. You'll have to find someone else to pad your ego. Save your money. Have your wife conduct the test, then she can report the results here! :) And if you did well, I'm sure she'd say, "You're wonderful!"
Just as a note, Dave Clark is hardly a "hot shot" that "auditions and takes measurements for a living.."
Dave is just like the rest of us, but for his passions may run a bit hotter for things audio then most of ours do. He is a school teacher by day and a genuine all around good guy. I think to say he makes his living at reviewing is a gross overstatement.
This is relevant as to the arguments that reviewers won't put their reputation on the line for a million. I think most would. Most reviewers are guys/gals who do if for the fun of it. For a million bucks I would think most would abandon their "reviewing career" at the chance for the cool mil.
I get paid $50 per review and I currently review about 2 or 3 products over the year (Thank God I have a license to practice law to fall back on). Yes, I can hear the differences between cables. But, the ONLY way I can hear that change is in MY own system that I have listened to for hours upon hours and know every intimate detail of how it produces music. I know these details of my systems sound and therefore, I know when something has changed.
That is how I review most of the mort subtle products such as cables. Honestly, it takes me several listen sessions to fully flesh out the difference and nuances of a new cable. Unlike speakers or amps where these changes are almost immediately apparent. I suspect that there are others, reviewers and otherwise, that can "hear" the most subtle difference loud, clear and immediately. It is different for everyone...
As I usually respond to the one that claims there "is" no difference between cables because they could not hear it .the only thing such a person has proved is, "they" cannot hear such a difference and not that a difference does not exist.
Metro04, do assume that DBTs or beyond scientific criticism. Many would claim that an invalid measure as most commonly used, namely 30 second exposures and that setting the testing hypothesis as no difference violates the logic that one cannot accept an hypothesis, but one can reject an hypothesis. This is the reason we normally seek a "null hypothesis" that a variable thought to be causing a relationship has no effect. Rejecting it then lends support for the relationship you wish to support.
Even if I took that test myself and heard a huge difference between those cables, I still couldn't bring myself to spend $7500 or some other exorbitant amount of money for a couple of pairs of wires, I'd feel like a fool, even if I did think the expensive wires sounded better. I'd probably try make wires just like them myself. Maybe I'm more of a cheapskate than a skeptic ;-).
Douglas_schroeder: >>>"Remember, skeptics are never satisfied with results as long as their world view is violated. Most would rather deny the results than change their world view."<<<
How funny! That's been the "believer's" angle towards just about any kind of legitimate (scientific) verification or testing methods (proof)!
Remember, skeptics are never satisfied with results as long as their worldview is violated. Most would rather deny the results than change their worldview.
Which makes them exactly the same as the audiophile beievers on the other side of this debate.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
