The Science of Cables

I'm starting to think all the analogue believers owe Schroeder Method a try. 

Analogue-believing cable skeptics, where are you? 

Don't we see more attempted explanation and measurement for cables than analogue rigs. I've not seen typically any measurements in relation to constituent components of turntables. Perhaps the entirety of home analogue is non-scientific. 

Do we have stringent evidence to the contrary? 

Is this a speck and log situation? Perhaps. What arguments of the objective analysis of analogue home process can be martialed? 

Well, perhaps I have a point worth discussing. I am open to enlightenment. 

douglas,

I'm unclear about what you mean when citing "explanations for analogue ."  Especially given you've mentioned vinyl.

Are you saying there is no one out there citing measurable, objective basis for why vinyl can sound different from digital sources?  

Pleased to see that cable science remains as contentious as ever with arguments having run now for many years... most of my life in fact! IMHO it probably comes down to what should be measured especially as frequency response and THD/IM distortion seem not too helpful other than maybe minor changes resulting in part from interface issues. The conundrum centres on what factor(s) can be measured where classical measurements (or more critically the way in which they are performed) normally offer poor sensitivity. last year i was invited to give the AES Heyser Lecture in Milano. I touched on a range of topics but decided to take the controversial step to include a section on cables... always dangerous! I reported on a recent experiment performed in consultation with Armour Home (QED) UK where they claimed surprisingly good correlation between measurement and (blind) subjective ranking of 4 cables types. I am not suggesting this is definitive or comprehensive but it is interesting nonetheless in giving some mechanistic insights. The lecture (hopefully) can be downloaded from: 

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/nqvvwnlh6n6b98z/AAC6kOb5NT8Gk8pceZSbpl2ha?dl=0

Please note you need initially to download the files and store them locally, not try to play them directly from the web. In addition there is a demo of a spectral-domain method of DSD-to-LPCM conversion which you are free to try. BTW I apologise in advance for the poor audio quality of the lecture... there was a network interface issue in the lecture theatre beyond my control (how unusual is that...). Anyway, hope its of interest.

At least you tried. 😀

Of course, the great irony is that AES generally speaking still thinks cables are controversial.

Prof, no, I am saying there appears to be no measurable, objective basis for cultivation of an analogue rig. I see that the same largely subjective assessment is used by analogue lovers in their use and consumerism as cable users. My concern is not at all with the topic of distinction between signals/sound quality of analogue vs digital. 

To the community; I come to you as the Analogue Skeptic. I have a few doubts about Vinyl. Please entertain my questions. BTW, realize that I have nothing against vinyl at all. I just have something against stilted logic and bullying using "science" as a bludgeon.  

My agenda in the past few posts is to defend the epistemology of aftermarket cable use by comparison to the epistemology of analogue, which I find rests upon the same assumptions and methods as cables, but is deemed legit and never questioned as being unscientific. I am exposing what I see as widespread hypocrisy in the audiophile community among those who use highly subjective assessment to "know" that their selections of equipment for analogue is legit, but mock the selections of cable fans, manufacturers, dealers, etc. as pseudo-scientific, a sham, foolish, etc. I think the white hot spotlight of assessment can be turned upon analogue. 

The implications of this comparison are profound, and I have drawn up some questions that I never see (I admit I don't watch the analogue forum, so I might be blind to a raging debate existing in the community, but I suspect not. Again, if I am wrong, I am open to being educated about that.) discussed around here, namely just how do analogue fans know that they are correct in their assessment of all things Vinyl? (I am at this time taking a focused approach; I suspect that I would find a similar basis for critique among analogue tape fans.) Do these kind of questions ever appear in the Digital forum? Perhaps so. If so, I would appreciate being told, "That's been discussed forever..." 

But, if so, why is there not a more tempered criticism of aftermarket cables? 

This topic is no mere diversion, but a serious question that begs to be weighed. Why is it, at least from my perspective, that Analogue as a sector of this hobby is given a pass, never critically assessed in terms of cost, motivation of the manufacturers, senility of the hobbyists who seem to be rabid about its use, etc. Cables are raked over the coals mercilessly, but I find pretty much the same assumptions and habits of the analogue fan as compared to cable fans. 

So, what gives? Do we have a pervasive double standard at work here? Are analogue fans hypocritical in their assault on aftermarket cables, while a casual assessment of the situation would yield a conclusion that they are twice as much a son of hell as cable believers? Have the analogue fans condemned aftermarket cable users as "unscientific" and a laughingstock while they do the same multiple times over with plinth, footers or isolation devices, tone arms, cartridges, motors and drive belts, phono cables, phono preamps, etc. - all adjudged by opinion! 

The only measurement I see discussed is related to table rpms. I think I also see measurements occasionally regarding table stability, elimination of vibration. I see a Grand Canyon sized hole in regard to meaningful data pertaining to analogue and comparison of one product to another. I see claims, I don't see measurements, you know, the science stuff. Frankly, I think there is more substantiation offered for cables by manufacturers than analogue products mentioned above. Shall we start questioning the motives of the manufacturers? Perhaps we should begin ridiculing analogue lovers as pursuing their own fantasies. Why not? The activity seems precisely the same as what cable users do. 

What defense would be offered by analogue fans? "Open your ears and listen! What, are you DEAF?" Subjective. If they go that direction with a defense, then they affirm that they have no scientific basis in assessment, but largely subjective, non-scientific. Aftermarket cable users are mercilessly ridiculed for such answers. What other answer can analogue fans give to such criticism when it is turned on them? 
So, as to the motivation and cost structure of analogue, the questions would be endless, as I have outlined a few above. When assessed epistemologically, is there any basis for condemning cables as contributing to the demise of the high end, while praising analogue for its contribution to revival of the high end? What if the relentless harangue  of turntable users is unwittingly driving away people while they employ� identical methods as cable fans? What precisely is so scientific about analogue? I find there is more unscientific about it than what I do in comparison of cables. I can compare sets of cables. Who compares entire analogue setups? A cartridge is changed, a tone arm is changed, exactly like a cable is changed. A subjective assessment happens, exactly as with cables. AND CABLE USERS ARE MOCKED FOR THEIR METHODS WHILE ANALOGUE USERS DO THE MOCKING? Shouldn't the hubris of the one who does this be pegged at 10+? 

Where's the science in analogue? What measurements accompany their assessment? Is it all subjective? Why, then, mock a cable user for their subjective assessment? How is the assessment of the tone arm or cartridge not as ludicrous, devoid of "science"? 

How can a person be an analogue fan and not see how hypocritical they are when they mock cable fans? I believe many cable skeptics are analogue fans because they believe they can set up a superior sounding rig for less money. Is that borne out by measurements? Is that not a purely subjective assessment? Can a $1K analogue rig outdo a $30K analogue rig? Why is this seemingly not a raging debate in audio? Have our analogue lovers done ABX between a cheap analogue setup and an expensive one in their room? Have they subjected their hobby to the same searing criticism they level at cables? 

Who is going to say THE ANALOGUE KING HAS NO CLOTHES? 
WHAT IS THE SCIENTIFIC BASIS OF ANALOGUE? Anyone? 

(Sincerely, I do not wish to be blind in condemnation of the epistemology of the hobby of analogue. If my assessment is erroneous, and the comparisons forced, then please discuss and enlighten me. I think it is a discussion worth having among us.)

Which of our analogue loving cable skeptics is going to try Schroeder Method?