Skeptic or just plain hard headed


So I purchased a pair of Morrow Audio phono cables. These are the PH3 with the Eichmann connectors. Wanted to start there to see if MA cables will be a viable option for my system.I think my story is not so unique to others who have purchased MA cables. So no need to go into the hu hum of burn-in in regards to MA cables, and how things sound bad at first, then gets better,  then excellent...yada yada yada. I know the story about this product.  I simply am one who is not a believer in electronics break in periods, or battery packs on cables, etc... Regardless of what side of the fence you are on in regards to that Im NOT trying to start that debate again please.. Anyway. After reading several reviews of the MA cables and understanding that most agreed that the cables needed a substantial burn-in time, and that the cables would not sound its best until this happens I decided to give them a try. Thinking ok lets get a jump on the burn-in period (if the concept is true). I paid for the 2 day burn-in service from MA. What I didn't expect is that when I got the cable it would sound as bad as it did in comparison to my existing name brand cable (not getting into that either, not relevant). I thought well the cable might not quite be up to snuff with all this talk about burn-in (if its true) but not that much of a difference.  I mean as soon as I dropped the needle on the record I immediately heard a profound difference in sound stage and clarity degridation. Needless to say this cable was destined to be returned to MA for a full refund and my thinking was "they are crazy if I am going to trade my cable for this cable" So I decided to give MA a call to setup the return. Talked with Mike Morrow (very nice guy by the way) and we had our differences in what I should expect out of his product. Now my Mother always told me that I have a hard head.. I heard that growing up all my life, and when you couple that with skepticism it makes a pretty, well lets just say not a very fun person to have a debate with lol. However Mike insisted that if I return the cable that I would be missing out on the fruit they would bare after 400 hours of break in. 400 hours??? really!. Oh at that point I was really ready to return them. I told all my friends "Mike must be nuts" (no offense Mike) no way am I going to wait a year to hear what this cable is capable of, AND I do not have any way to expedite the process...at least I thought I didn't until I found an old sound bar I don't use anymore with analog inputs. Ok I know you pro MA and  pro cable burn-in folks are chomping at the bit. Im almost done. Take your hands off the keyboard for just a few more lines. 

So here is the deal to be fair I am going to be open minded about this because Mike really made me feel like I would be missing out if I return the cable without a proper burn-in (great salesman), and since he had such conviction I now think I have to test this thing out right??. Now I know that there are testimonials out there about how the MA cable improved over 100s of hours in their system, and that they are now "blown away". However can you really hear a profound difference in a cable you play in your system over 170 hours or so?  I would think a gradual difference would be harder to detect. I mean my system seems to sound better to me everyday without making any changes. Is it because of  continued cable and electronics burn in?? maybe. Or maybe its just my brain becoming more intimate with the sound of my system. Well this test I'm doing should reveal a night and day difference from what the system sounds like today with the cable pre burn-in if there is any merit to the notion. In regards to does it sound better than my existing cable that is yet to be determined. I think my goal now is to prove or dis-prove if cable burn-in is a real thing. This whole idea has evolved from if it's an improvement or not over what I use today. We can discuss that later.

I now have the cable connected between a cd player , and a sound bar with a CD playing on repeat. The disc of choice for this burn-in is rather dynamic so it should be a good test. At the end of 16 days (384 hours) I will move the cables to my reference system and do about another 20 hours of additional burn-in to compensate for moving the cable. This will put a total of 452 hours of burn-in on the PH3. When I put this cable back in my system I sure hope it sings because this is a lot to go through to add a cable to your system. Mike if you are right I will eat crow and will preach from the highest mountain top that you are right, and that cable burn-in is REAL.  For me anyway the myth will be considered busted or reinforce my belief that cable burn-in is a bunch of BS. 

For those who will argue the point of cable burn-in I fully understand the concept, and I don't plan to get sucked down that rat hole and I won't argue that....yet because at the end of this test I may be in your camp and I don't want to have a steady diet of crow so for now I will remain neutral on the subject until the test is complete.  However I will be totally transparent and honest about the results. So not trying to make anyone angry as I know beliefs about audio are sensitive subjects, and rightfully so this hobby is expensive and I like you have a substancial investment in this. Just trying to get to the truth. I also understand that cable burn-in may actually happen when you consider it from a scientific perspective, but the real question is can you actually hear the difference.  

I will report back to this thread in 17 days from today (need at least one day to evaluate) with the results. 

happy listening!!

-Keith
barnettk

Showing 6 responses by prof

Hi Keith!

You have mentioned your natural inclination towards skepticism.  I’m curious about the nature of yourr skepticism.  If it is merely a tendency towards cynicism or doubt, that is fully compatible with being fooled, because every human experienced powerful bias effects.  This is why you can find testimonials for every dubious, whacky belief you can think of, from cult members following a guru, to people believing in the cheesiest of faith healers, to the astrology, psychics, dowsing, crystal and energy healing, fake alternative medicines....the list is endless for which you can find the “converted skeptic” testimonial.   

Because most people don’t understand the power of human biases and cognitive error.
They think mere “doubt” is a firewall to being fooled.

There is another version of Skepticism that is more along the lines of holding off on conclusions while applying critical thinking, especially to controversial claims.

This isn’t mere “doubt” but rather taking a look at the big picture, seeing if the claims make sense, seeing what people with the relevant expertise have to say in the subject, looking at how the claims fit with other things science accepts, and ESPECIALLY being cognizant of the variable of human imagination and bias effects.  One could not be a Skeptic in the sense of being a critical thinker while dismissing or ignoring  the reality (so much of it scientifically documented) of bias in our perception.  

And when you actually start trying to control for your own biases you can come face to face with how powerful they are.
When you hear what seems to be an “obvious” difference disappear when you don’t know which cable or device you are hearing, it’s very edicational.

So I’m wondering what type of skepticism you would like to think you are bringing to your test.  If it is a sighted test where you know you are listening to your new cable and trying to hear burn in over (a ridiculous!) period of hundreds of hours, this is absolutely ripe for regular old perceptual errors and bias to intervene.
It doesn’t guarantee you will think you hear any difference, but the problem is that if you aren’t controlling for bias you will not have distinguished between “real physically audible changes” and ones you imagine.

Please keep in mind:  none of the above suggests you ought to blind test, or that you shouldn’t just proceed as you are and buy whatever you perceive you like.   No one should be dictating what anyone else buys or why.  I’d have most of my own gear taken away if my wife dictated what I should be spending my money on. :)

But if your goal is to truly determine if you have in your hands sound evidence for cable burn in, with a mind to skepticism questioning, THEN you should realize the inherent faults in your current evaluating method for doing so.

Cheers.


Thanks for the considered reply Keith.

As I said I’m absolutely not trying to declare, or convince you, that you heard no real sonic difference with your burned in cable. I was only raising points to consider if you are really trying to get careful perusing the truth of the matter. It seems you are in the “If I thought I heard an obvious difference I couldn’t have been mistaken” camp. That is of course your prerogative. But that conclusion really does rely on ignoring the power of bias.

I’ve been there. I had a very high end ac cable that I was positive changed the sound of my system when hooked up to my DAC or CD player. Everything sounded smoother, more lush, less hash, less bright, more transparent in to the recording. It was just....OBVIOUS! It was so obvious that I noticed a darkened rolled off character that started to make me question if I even liked my system with this power cable. When something makes you go from “I love the sound of my system” to “this is so different I don’t think I actually like it,” that’s so obvious why even question it, right? If I were in the camp of “my ears are always right” I wouldn’t question for a moment that the cable altered my system. Like you have not.

But....in the quest to put my finger on what was happening I had someone help me do a blind shoot out between this high end cable and my regular cheap stock AC cable. It turned out that once I couldn’t see or know which cable was in the system
I couldn’t hear any difference at all! There was just nothing of those obvious sonic traits I attributed to the cable there to cue me vs the sound of the stock cable.
It was absolutely head-spinning to experience this encounter with the power of sighted bias. A learning experience.

And unless someone has ever done it, or is inclined to test his perception this way, he will usually take the view “well that all may be interesting and apply to YOU but it doesn’t apply to ME. I KNOW what I heard.”

btw, blind tests don’t always fail to support audible differences. Often enough they support them. In my case I’ve correctly distinguished DACs and CD players, for instance.

Anyway, again, peace be to whatever way you wish to go about testing gear. No one needs to turn their high end hobby in to a science lab.

Cheers.

Oh jeeze, I don’t mean to cause you any more work Keith!

But since you seem to be up to more testing...

Its no good to rely on concepts like “X person has no interest in the gear so if they report hearing a difference it can’t be bias and must be accurate.”

No one is immune to sighted bias effects. The mere act of listening for differences can make people perceive differences even if they don’t “care” about the outcome.

If you really mean to do some form of home-brew blind test, here are some ideas from my own ac cable blind testing, some or all of which you may want to employ:

The fact it will be a single blind test doesn’t completely invalidate the test, but single blind tests suffer from the possibility of “experimentor bias.” That is so long as the person conducting the test knows which cable is which, they can influence the outcome in subtle unconscious ways - including subtlety tipping off the subject in ways neither are aware.

To try to control for this I did the following:

1. Pattern of switching is randomized. This is standard for blind testing. Say you are going to do 12 trials (switches). The person doing the switching can flip a coin 12 times and write down the sequence of heads and tails. He can use that sequence to follow for switching the cables.

2. Use a blind fold of some kind if possible to reduce likelihood of peeking :)

3. Try to reduce communicating (hence reduce possible subtle cues) between you and the switcher. Best of you listen to your music selection and simply say “switch” each time you want (the switcher then following the random pattern arrived at with the coin flips). Best of the switcher doesn’t say anything at all during the trial.

4. I wanted to make sure I couldn’t tell
just by the sound of the plugs going in or out which cable has been plugged in. Therefore we did a little pre-trial of only the cables being switched on my command (blindfolded). The sequence being decided by coin flip. Once that trial established my guesses were random, I could be more confident I’d dealt with that variable.

Again: things to consider. It can be easier than many think to screw up blind testing, But even casual blind testing can be kind of fun and intersting.

Best of luck!





@barnettk

Exciting!

As to finally putting the ac cable issue to rest, whatever result you get will not lay it to rest. My “negative” results for detecting sonic differences do not settle that AC cables can’t alter the sound in either my or other peoples systems. All I can say is that I failed to find support for the hypothesis that they change the sound (or that the particular ones I tried did not do so).


And if asked I detail the method of evaluation for inspection. Someone else should be wary of just accepting my results - I could be fibbing, or exaggerating, or I could have honestly screwed up somewhere in the method. That’s why replicable results by other parties have a place in empirical research. The same would go for your results.

After condicting tests it’s up to me to situate my experience in the bigger picture so far as I’ve investigated it: for me this fits best with the fishy style of claims made by after market cable sellers, with the fact I’ve seen many with accredited knowledge of electronics convincingly debunk the technical claims, and with the fact that in decades of looking in to the controversies I have not once seen a credible report of someone detecting a difference in controlled conditions - and have seen failure to do so in controlled conditions.
I’ve seen a couple times before someone on the net claims to have discerned ac cable differences in blind tests, only to find out after extended questioning that they were exaggerating or naive about how to do blind tests.

One person I believe back in this thread claimed to have easily passed blind tests
for AC cables numerous times. As he would be a complete anomaly in doing so, I’d want much more detail and documentation that he did so than just his say-so.

If your results - truly blinded - suggest you hear a difference then it’s reasonable for YOU to use that as a data point in favour of aftermarket AC cables, and it’s up to others as to how strong your case is in terms of adding evidence for audible differences.

Have fun!
Cool.

I’m sure I missed some previous details.
What “recording?”   It sounds like you used a cassette deck to record a music signal from....a DAC?  Turntable?

So your friend is going to choose which side of the cassette to play?

You can blind test for preference but best when there is question of audibility at all is to test for that.   The ABX sequence is best (where you know the identity of A and B as you listen, then next you have to identity if X is A or B).   Lacking that you can just try to identify the cables “This is A or B cable.”

10 trials are the usual minimum for any statistical confidence.

Ideally you should minimize communication between you and the switcher.  Possible facial expressions can even be clues.

Anyway sounds fun!

If I can swing it I may blind test some more cables soon.


@barnettk 

Bravo for being open minded enough to follow through on your test!!!!!

I’m too busy enjoying my beach vacation at the moment to reply in detail.   Will get back when convenient.

Cheers