2. misc-audio
  3. 169215-164950

The "Snake Oil" Trope

Yeah I know, a controversial topic, but after 30+ years of hearing both sides and seeing how the argument has evolved over the years, I want to say my piece.

First, I want to debunk the idea of ever using the term, "Snake Oil" because it has been incorrectly appropriated and is not being applied genuinely. For a product to be "Snake Oil" it isn't a simple matter of, "it doesn't do what it claims to do." It has to contain a few more qualities. Chief among them, the materials or ingredients have to be fake, falsified, or non-existent. I have yet to encounter a single premium cable manufacturer who has claimed to use copper or silver and it was fake.

This would be an example of cable "Snake Oil" if it existed:

Company claim: "A 10 gauge speaker wire made of ten 9's pure silver, extracted from conflict-free mines, using NASA quality FEP dielectrics, braided in 24 strands of 17 gauge wire, all concealed in the newly developed element, Star-Spangled-Bannerite, that enhances and boosts all frequencies, repairing broken audio as it travels down the conductor."

Reality: Cutting open the wire you find 3 strands of 14 gauge aluminum wire, wrapped in Glad's saran-wrap, threaded through a 10 gauge rubber garden hose, covered in a fancy colored net.

My biggest problem with the nay-sayer community is the hypocrisy of their accusation that premium quality cables are "Snake Oil" when their charts, measurements and tests have the same level of skepticism they purport to debunk. Using "Snake Oil" to prove "Snake Oil?" Ask yourself the following questions when you next see some online or vlog rant about how cables don't make a difference and they have the measurements to prove it:

1) Did they actually connect the cables to speakers and listen?
2) If they made measurements, did they show you how those cables were connected when they conducted the tests?
3) If it is a vlog, did they show in the video live footage of them conducting the test or is everything after-the-fact?
4) How does the test prove quality and how does the author quantify "quality?"

99% of the time the answer is "no." You just see people posting pictures of charts that could have been made using any form of software.  Heck, I could make one in Photoshop that dictates any conclusion I want. The truth is, there isn't a single form of equipment or measurement software that tests the actual perceived quality or clarity of a signal.

For example, "that guy" from Audioholics posted a video bashing a $4000 Audioquest speaker cable.  He claims to have run it through tests and he posted pictures of graphs that he gave conclusions for.  Not once did he show how it was connected to the machines or equipment. More over, he claimed to have broken the cable, by easily snapping off the banana plug (made of pure copper coated in silver). Well, if that were true, then how could he have possibly connected the cable correctly to test it?  He also claimed the cable was on loan from Audioquest.  Red flag. Audioquest does not send out one speaker cable to test; they'd have sent out a pair.  He also wasn't at all concerned that he had broken a $4000 loaner cable.  Therefore, I suspect someone else broke their own cable and let "this guy" borrow it for a video. Lastly, he claims to test the effectiveness of the "DBS" system by showing you a digital read out on some other machine.  He claims to unplug the DBS system live...but...off screen, and the digital read out changes. That makes absolutely no sense, since the DBS system isn't tied to the actual conductors or connectors. It's a charged loop from end to end and only keeps the insulation's dielectric field charged. So unplugging it while a signal is being passed through the cable wouldn't change anything. Therefore,  the nay-sayer argument, in this instance, was nothing more than "Snake Oil" trying to prove "Snake Oil."

Another time, someone was given a premium XLR cable, but had no idea what an XLR cable was.  They didn't recognize the connector format; a red flag straight away!  Then goes on to claim all the different measurements they took from it and how it was no better than the free cables you get from manufacturers.  Well, if that is true, how was this cable connected to the equipment? If he didn't know what the XLR format was, then it stands to reason they didn't have an XLR input on the equipment they used to test. Therefore, how in the world was this an equitable or viable test of the quality if the cable's conductors weren't all being used correctly during the test? Not once did this person connect it to an audio system to say how it sounded. How do electrical measurements translate into sound quality if one refuses to listen to it?

My final argument against the nay-sayers is one they all have the most trouble with. They don't use the Scientific Method.  For example, where's the control in these tests? What system or cable do they universally *ALL* agree is perfect and that they test against? The systems and cables always change and are never consistent. Why is it that they argue for an A / B test, but aren't willing to set one up for themselves? As if it's someone else's responsibility because they refuse to be responsible for their conclusions. Why is it that they only test low end or middle grade cables, but never seem to run these tests on the highest levels? Why is it that the majority of nay-sayers never purchase any of this equipment to find out for themselves?

What I have discovered after 30+ years of arguing this topic, is that the nay-sayers just don't want to have to buy expensive cables.  Instead they seek out any form of cognitive bias they can find to use as justification to not buy it.  Then suddenly concern themselves with other people's purchase power and tell them not to purchase such cables, as if these people are spending their money. Or they claim that they should have spent all that money on better equipment. Touche', but if they bought better equipment, they'd still buy premium cables to push that better equipment. That's like saving your money to buy a Lamborghini, then deciding on buying 15 inch steel rims with narrow tires for it because wheels are wheels...they bought a better vehicle, so won't need premium tires...or premium gas because the engine is superior. *eye roll.* What it seems to boil down to is that they don't like the idea that just buying premium cables alone can surpass a high grade, well-engineered system. To borrow from my car analogy, buying premium tires for a 4-cylynder hatch back won't make it go any faster, but it will effect some performance, likely gas mileage and road grip. Using the same analogy, buying better cables is akin to buying a turbo kit, back-exhaust system, better suspension, better intake valves, better cold air filters, etc to make that 4-cylinder hatch back perform nearly as well as a stock   Lamborghini.

Final thoughts, "Snake Oil" salesmen back in the day weren't just interested in defrauding their customers, they wanted to do it with the least amount of effort. They didn't try to get authentic, high quality ingredients to make the oil look or taste better.  They used whatever was on-hand and as free as possible. Cable companies sure seem to go out of their way to acquire the best possible conductors and materials, and have R&D teams engineer complicated wire geometries and spend years finding ways to treat the cables, or develop active tech to impact the signal, just so they can make a few bucks. If the product had absolutely no impact on sound quality, at all,  it wouldn't take long for well-engineered systems to reveal their faults and the industry would tank, almost over night. Clearly, they haven't and it's because it isn't "Snake Oil" no matter how many times that old trope is trotted out.

One of the serious problems in this entire discussion is that the perception of "quality" is 100% subjective to the listener, the state of the equipment, the room it is being conducted in, and health of the listener. After years of auditioning my system to people, I realized it isn't a simple matter of asking, "How did that sound to you." You have to be very specific.  Ask, "Did you hear that specific sound?"  9 times out of 10, they'll say they didn't hear it.  So you play it again and point it out.  Then they light up and realize that no matter how many times they heard that song, they had never heard that particular sound.  Then they go and compare it to the car radio or through their device's ear buds and realize they cannot hear it or couldn't hear it as clear.  Then they come to respect what you're trying to achieve.




128x128guakus

Showing 14 responses by sns

sns
3,003 posts
 
Claimants of snake oil are disingenuous at best. Those not using those $3 aluminum conductor tin plated connector cables and using copper and gold plated connectors are already admitting to metallurgical differences. The next implicating statement they often use, 'any competently engineered cable is sufficient.' And so now engineering becomes part of equation, really!
sns
3,003 posts
 
Gaukas, both VH Audio and Duelund sell bulk wire manufactured specifically designed and manufactured for audio use.
I use both in making diy Helix power cords, pretty complex cords, long thread here in reference to these cable. Also recipes for IC and speaker.
Best pc's I've tried, and believe me I've tried many up to and including multiples of $1k.
sns
3,003 posts
 
@guakus, Duelund makes a bulk cable devoid of dialectic, and both VH Audio and Duelund (as do many other manufacturers) has a variety of bulk cable with dialectic. Now if you are talking about creating your own wire from ingot you are correct.
And yes, I am constructing my own cables using varied metallurgy and different construction techniques.
I doubt very much you could get a wire manufacturer to make a particular wire to your exact specification without larger quantity order. And I trust far more in experienced audio manufacturer to spec quality bulk wire than myself.


sns
3,003 posts
 
@vinylguy2016Do you believe you could hear difference between $3 cheapo aluminum conductor, tin plated connector cable and your $50 cable in double blind test? And did you in fact conduct such a test? Assuming you did and $50 cable came out ahead, what aspect of this cable's design or materials caused this sound improvement? And assuming you do credit design or materials or both as causing this sound improvement, why would you assume your $50 cable couldn't be improved upon by another cable's different design and/or materials used? Have you actually done double blind testing of your cable vs. any number of other cables?

As for cognitive bias, you certainly seem to have plenty, must feel good to know $50 cables sound as good or better than all the high priced illusions or delusions we buy into.

By the way, I don't proscribe to the pricier the better belief system. I make my own cables, and they deliver quality sound. I don't rate them on some simplified, objectified linear scale of best to worse. To believe our mind/ear complexity can be measured by presently available equipment designed by today's limited knowledge is laughable. Cognitive bias and placebo effects barely touch on the complexity of our sense of hearing and evaluations of sound quality. Double blind testing for audio quality  using short segments of music is liable to so many variables, very insubstantial evidence.
sns
3,003 posts
 
I'm wondering how the objectivists came to make their purchasing decisions? Did you do double blind tests on cables you purchased, or was it a subjective decision?
I've seen very few double blind tests in regard to cables or audio equipment over many years. The few I've seen have been from audiophile  associations, clubs or just a few guys getting together. Always see varied judgements, sometimes a modicum of  consensus, other times not. Evidence for correlation in some cases, this is not good enough for concrete conclusions.

As for running the double blind tests, why do you need the manufacturer of cable to participate? You guys should be running these on regular basis, get the subjectivists amongst us to participate. One side says you need to experience a variety of cables at all price points to gain knowledge, the other, you need to participate in double blind tests to gain knowledge. Well, certainly easy to experience a variety of cables in our free market capitalist system. Not so easy to participate in double blind tests. We subjectivist have provided many entry points to ascertain for yourself whether cables make a difference or not. Isn't it up to you guys to provide us with opportunities to participate in rigorous scientific double blind tests? The subjectivists are fine with the status quo, you guys seem to not like so much. We subjectivists absolutely need to hear for ourselves your particular chosen cable vs. our chosen cable in double blind test. I can't just take your testimony as proof, talk about snake oil salesmen!
sns
3,003 posts
 
So much for scientific rigor. My last post's questions as to cable naysayers cable purchasing decisions was not meant to be rhetorical. So it seems the objectivist cable purchases are actually subjective choices, based on whatever? They don't in fact practice what they preach in regard to cable purchases, they didn't use double blind testing in determining their purchase.

I understand they have a point to make in there isn't always scientifically valid explanations as to claims of qualitative sound differences in cables. But this doubt isn't proof there isn't, many reasons for that, plenty of posts in other cable threads as to those reasons.

As to simplified judgments as to how we subjectivists are sheep and mindless consumers of marketing drivel. Some may be, but the vast majority of us, based on my observations are simply seeking the best sound quality at a price we can afford. We don't care about packaging, manufacturer's boasts of this and that. We simply listen to cables in our systems and make judgements as to what sounds best. Seems like all you so called objectivists have done the same, unless you're one who refuses to audition cables above some subjective price point.
Years ago, when all this cable controversy began, I decided to learn for myself as to validity of various conclusions. I tried many, many cables through lending library at Cable Company, digital, analog, speaker, IC, power, balanced, single ended. The only final valid conclusion I could come to is that cables do sound different from one another. Does price correlate to sound quality, sometimes yes, sometimes no. Some of the cables I tried were highly praised, didn't do anything for me. My take away was perhaps they did in their system, not in mine, no objective conclusions for me. I could have concluded those people tin eared or delusional, but I choose to not be so judgemental when I've not heard those exact cables in their systems, in their listening rooms.

The extreme complexity and uniqueness of our systems and our ear/brains/minds makes it impossible to judge what another hears from their system. The whole undertaking of building and listening to an audio system is just so overwhelmingly subjective in totality, how one can assign some objective criteria to the entire experience is simply wrongheaded. Yes, objective criteria can be used for certain components within the entire system, but in a global sense, I think not. And then, why is it that every system is likely singularly unique in this total human population, could it have something to do with it being a subjective experience? In the end, I cannot objectively judge anyone's subjective judgment of their own system. I can have ideas in regard to their system based on my experience, but judgments, no.
Finally, in the end, I don't really care whether one believes cables sound different or not. It has no bearing on my listening to my system and the pleasure or angst it brings. This ongoing and never ending argument is much more about ego, attempts to make people think like us is a fool's errand.
sns
3,003 posts
 
The human hears differently than the machine. but then I could get a robot to listen for me and report on sound.
sns
3,003 posts
 
That's why I've not purchased a robot.
sns
3,003 posts
 
Ideas and opinions are increasingly obsolete as humankind evolves/devolves. Innovations in human communication means we all have more than enough information to become expert in whatever endeavor/debate we choose. Experts tend to become enamored with their opinions/ideas, segue into beliefs.

Recently, it came to my attention that robots/machines cannot hear, and humans cannot be objective. Therefore, I will carry on as before and listen and build my system for my own pleasure. I heard cables with different sound signatures, therefore, cable choices for me may be in flux from time to time.
I have no problem with naysayers claims that cables make no difference to them, this is a subjective viewpoint. But for them to claim cables can make no difference to anyone goes into the belief realm. Also, hypocritical in when backing this claim with scientific rigor in the form of double blind tests which they in fact didn't use when deciding on their own cable purchase.
I do see this one difference between the two packs of believers. While cable believers will argue amongst themselves as to qualitative judgments of cables, naysayers have no such issue. Many shades of grey for most cable believers, its all black and white for the objectivists. So my question is: Can a belief system even exist when so many shades of grey exist? Seems like pretty shaky religion to me. So, are we in fact, not really believers, merely holders of opinions? Belief thrives in black and white estimations of truth.

Further, this belief is built on the idea of scientific rigor and double blind tests. Has a single naysayer ever heard every single cable in double blind test?  Assuming not, an absolutist belief system built on speculation, that kind of belief system shouldn't last a day.

This is the last subjectivist vs objectivist cable thread I'll participate in. There is no argument really, we're all subjectivists and to say otherwise is a falsehood. No machine or robots can stand in for us and present us with some objective set of data to negate human subjectivity, and no religion or belief system can dictate what is objective truth. I leave it to those defending beliefs and religions to fight it out.
sns
3,003 posts
 
I can understand their argument we're all just hearing things we wish to hear.

What I can't understand is when they claim double blind testing is gold standard, then when not used, go to this basic science argument. In this case they completely disregard the listening experience as valid, they are not even willing to listen for themselves! They invalidate themselves, I'd like to know what the hell they're hearing in their own systems, how can they trust what they're hearing!
As for the basic science issue. Do they seriously believe the few measurements they offer tell us everything we need to know about how a certain cable, component will sound. They assume its all settled science, no future understanding, measurements will ever be discovered. They are in fact not using science in this argument. The scientific method builds upon past knowledge with present knowledge and allows for future knowledge.

This is all settled law for these guys, they are the supreme court of audio. You can never overturn their interpretation of law, talk about the rule of man! Beyond this, who appointed them to this supreme court, I know it wasn't me and I presume it wasn't you. These guys not scientist, biased attorneys/politicians at best. Beyond all this, they don't like our freedom to believe in our own senses, the supreme court will dictate our senses for us. Man, this is beginning to sound like some dystopian future! Seems they're already living in it, not believing in their own senses, sad.
sns
3,003 posts
 
Its been a long time since I've been flailing trying to better performance of my system. Every listening session over past few years has been pure musical ecstasy. I ended my cable auditioning quite a few years ago, present cables (and likely last cables I'll ever purchase) are combo of off the shelf and diy, total expenditure likely somewhere less than 5% of total system cost. I arrived here by listening to many cables over many years, all price ranges.

So, we who believe cables sound different are not all flailing around falling for hype, fancy packaging, etc. To assume we're all stooges of some cable conspiracy is a false generalization meant to demean us and elevate oneself. 

My bottom line for the skeptical will remain, use double blind testing if you must, to validate your beliefs and/or purchases. Or just listen and judge, trust your senses.  I don't presume to judge your skepticism as unwarranted, just as you shouldn't judge my experience and purchasing choices.
For those who've made up their minds on either side of the issue, why the need to denigrate the other? Only shows personal weakness, need to have opponents agree with you. Are you really that insecure?


sns
3,003 posts
 
I've always heard differences between cables, even when I had relatively lower resolution systems. I auditioned tons of cables through lending library at Cable Company over a period of years. Minimum price was around $1k for any cable up to max price around $5k for any cable (this mid 2000's, these mid 2000 prices, adjust today's price for inflation). My take away was not always direct correlation between price/performance. And then, of course, some cables more sympathetic with one's system than another, this may also impact price/performance ratio. I most clearly heard differences based on metallurgy of cable, I can't imagine anyone not hearing difference between copper and silver cables! I also tried mixtures of metallurgy such as gold/silver and silver plated copper, slightly less difference here. I also tried variety of cable geometries and dielectrics, heard differences here as well, although not to same degree as metallurgy. In degree of difference, in general I heard greatest from power cords, then speaker cables, last IC and digital.
And so, now to today. One would think I'd be using extremely high priced cables after having heard and/or owned so many at all price points. On the contrary, I now exlusively use relatively low priced diy  power cords, a Helix design made with Vh Audio Airlock hot cable, various others for neutral and ground. These around $350 to $500 each to make. I use Cardas Golden Reference or DIY Helix with Vh Audio or Duelund IC and speaker cables. Not top of line or highest cost cables by any means.
So, what does this all mean in the end for me? While I hear differences between cables, I'm agnostic as to price. I've previously owned much higher priced cables such as Kimber Cable Trifocal XL, Purist Audio Dominus, close to top of line Synergistics, Shunyata Anaconda, Nordost Valhala, Siltech forget the model, Revelation Audio Labs silver, and some others I"m forgetting. All were nice, have no complaints, but they're all gone, what does that say? I'm not going to say the Helix is the greatest, I'd likely be happy with any of above. I will say the fact I've owned higher priced cables points to my having heard improvements vs lower priced cables. In general, the best highest price cables had greater resolution, transparency, frequency extension than best medium price. Keep in mind I heard a lot of high priced cables that didn't outperform lower priced. I culled my purchases from many more high priced cables auditioned I didn't find impressive, at least in my system.

I don't recommend any particular cable, or any price level of cable, none is the best for all situations. In the end, all I can say is cables sound different. Don't take my word for it, nothing can take the place of personal experience. You don't need to enrich cable manufacturers, diy on the cheap, bypass what you consider snake oil salesmen.  And if you still refuse to hear, I don't care, its fine to not believe they don't sound different, its not my place or need to inform you otherwise. Just as I don't speak for you, you shouldn't speak for me.
sns
3,003 posts
 
Having built a number of audio systems over the years, I've experienced and observed why cables are perceived the way they are.
I start builds by first choosing speakers and amps as a package. This is both the most critical stage of building system and the most important equipment within the system. Especially the speaker, start off with wrong choice and you'll invariably end up at dead end. Next, in my case, linestage, since I always run both analog and digital, then comes source equipment.

I'll add the above is built upon two fundamentals, both AC delivery and room could be thought as critical components, both were taken care of very early in this process. I've been in same dedicated listening room for over twenty years, so these two things have been fairly static since I found a satisfying solution.
So then we come to fine tuning the system, this includes things like equipment racks, footers, cables. During fine tuning stage what may seem like undue attention is paid to individual aspects such as footers on any piece of equipment, individual cables. One may perceive this one particular cable as being the cause of some perceived sound quality anomalie, therefore, any number of cables may be auditioned. Perhaps they discover a particular cable that cures this anomalie, in the moment that cable may be perceived as an extremely important component. This particular cable and all cables for that matter now become far more important than their actual contribution to the entire system. I presume this is the point when you see people extolling the virtues of some particular cable. Some may remain fixated upon the moment this cable or cables took their system 'over the top'. They then go on to misjudge the true percentage of contribution this cable or cables made to the entire system.
Having gone through this same process any number of times over many years, I now have what I think is a more accurate perception of cable's value to the entire system. I no longer hear cable changes that take my system 'over the top'. My present system has reached the most pleasurable state ever experienced without the most expensive cables I previously owned. I segued out of them because over time they weren't this perfect solution I may have previously perceived them being. Its somewhat counterintuitive, but my experience has been the more my systems improved the less cables mattered. All the top of line cables I've auditioned or owned have had relatively strong particular flavorings which didn't turn out to work in long run. My take is these strong flavorings were chosen to make them stand out against others. Once your system is well balanced and natural sans cables you don't want or need the strong flavorings. I now perceive cables as workmanlike in nature, just get out the way, let the equipment create the sound signature.


sns
3,003 posts
 
I think you're misunderstanding me. I'm surely not saying cable are snake oil, or am I saying all premium cables are not deserving of premium price. I've only been continually making the point cables sound different from one another in my experience, this is making the point cables are not snake oil.

Certainly, its not my prerogative to tell someone else what they hear, if they don't hear difference, fine with me. On the other hand, they also don't have the prerogative to tell me I'm delusional when I claim to hear differences, they don't and can't know what I hear.
I also never said the premium cables I previously owned were not fine sounding. I simply found cables I preferred and moved on. And I do use higher cost digital cables, specifically AQ Vodka and Diamond. I hear definite advantage to these cables vs. lower cost I purchased and/or auditioned.
Bottom line, is agree no room for insults, strong opinions fine. Keeping it at opinion one is mindful there are other opinions. Opinions segueing  into belief is when the insults start flying. And if I'm understanding you correctly, don't  be so defensive when someone like myself is actually agreeing with you, just not on board with the idea you need to spend a lot of money to get superb sound quality.
More to discover