The Truth About Power Cords and there "Real" Price to Performance

I am sure it is not just me that questions the agenda of someone that actively tries to suppress people learning.

Probably the #1 lesson that an audiophile can learn is that they are susceptible to bias. If and audiophile claims they are not, they are likely lying not only to you, but to themselves.

One doesn’t need to do "tedious" testing processes in ones own home. One just needs a friend that switches cables (or lies and tells you that he did), so you don’t know what you are listening to. No huge study design, no exhaustive testing procedures, and the perfect testing system and environment .. your system, your room. Anyone who tells you there is no value in doing a test this way is lying to you.

cleeds2,585 posts11-25-2019 12:11pm Exactly. And ABX may have particular value in the engineering and development of a component, where the test is most likely to be conducted in accordance with accepted protocols. But properly organizing and conducting such tests is a tricky business. It’s also a tedious and time consuming pursuit that usually doesn’t yield much benefit to the audiophile.

mahgister

When i buy a piece of gear, or evaluate my room, or judge the impact of some modification in my audio system, i dont claim for a universal validity, but i claim and vouch from my own experience and personal history of listening, in my particular room with my particular gear... Reducing that to an A/B/X test is pointless ...

Exactly.

Reducing that complex and very individual and personal history with ABX tests ... is perhaps good for marketting, or engineering technology ...

Exactly. And ABX may have particular value in the engineering and development of a component, where the test is most likely to be conducted in accordance with accepted protocols. But properly organizing and conducting such tests is a tricky business. It's also a tedious and time consuming pursuit that usually doesn't yield much benefit to the audiophile.

Let’s just say that many people hold onto illusions virtually their whole life.

You speak like Buddha....


Me I want to dissipate my illusions, and gain some "objective audio illumination", and for that I will read your posts among others, but without erasing the last persistent subjective illusion I live with and for, called music in my audio room with my gear and tweaks...

I will vouch my whole life for this particular illusion  called music by me with my own audio room in evolution... 

atdavid529 posts11-25-2019 11:53amOther than the process, there is nothing objective at all about blind testing, or ABX testing. The actual testing is 100% purely subjective. By removing sighted bias, it ensures a much higher level of subjectivity.

Then you say the samething  that I was just saying the post before in other words...Glad we understand each other...

I would offer a suitable response to this question, but I believe some would view my response as not politically correct. Let's just say that many people hold onto illusions virtually their whole life.

no illusion can persist in a cumulative long history,

Unfortunately I believe the only answer you will get to "why" is excuses. The why is obvious. High chance of failure coupled with high cost of failure.

My point was I can not find any posts on the internet where someone could reliably differentiate between a $100 cable and a $1000-$10,000+ one (and that is what this post was originally about). You would think at one of the large audio conventions some high end company with their uber expensive cables would have some superlistener who could show the world there is a difference. Why don’t they do that?

atdavid
Perceived significant changes in ones own personal system often disappear when bias (visual sighting) is removed.

All the changes that were implemented by the change in my audio system were made in a " cumulative" personal history, no illusion can persist in a cumulative long history, except for this particular complex illusion, which is the articulate sum history of all my bias, linked to individual pleasure called music....

Other than the process, there is nothing objective at all about blind testing, or ABX testing. The actual testing is 100% purely subjective. By removing sighted bias, it ensures a much higher level of subjectivity.

atdavid

I favor A/B auto testing...Not for eliminating bias tough, but more to begin to be conscious of them...Musical personal perception history is entirely based on subjective articulate bias in evolution...Therefore not reducible to any "objective laws" of perception or of engineering...It is impossible to design a perfect universal piece of gear that will satisfy all and each human on the planet.... Precisely because musical personal perception history is entirely based on subjective articulate bias in constant evolution...

This is why your personal "experiences" when evaluating new equipment should be as blind as possible, so you can eliminate bias which is exceptionally powerful.  Perceived significant changes in ones own personal system often disappear when bias (visual sighting) is removed.

but not a method able to explain musical perception in his relation to sound perception in an individual personal history...

I have no doubt you can hear differences from the extreme low end cables or thin zip cord vs. one costing $50+. I did my own blinded test with my friends hitting the A/B button with a DIY interconnect and the throw away Chinese interconnect. I could hear a difference and so could could my friends at least 85% of the time.

My point was I can not find any posts on the internet where someone could reliably differentiate between a $100 cable and a $1000-$10,000+ one (and that is what this post was originally about). You would think at one of the large audio conventions some high end company with their uber expensive cables would have some superlistener who could show the world there is a difference. Why don’t they do that?

There is some objective collective truth in sound perception, but musical perception is more complex than just sound perception and taking into account the different genetic potential of each one of us and our own different individual listening history, it is impossible and illusory to reduce this individual history to some objective collective laws of hearing...We lear to listen music on our own term with a specific history and potential where we transform our own experience with musical experiences that are very different and varied in their impact for each one of us...Our continuously transforming experience with sound is the way to go deeper in our personal musical experience...Music perception does not reduce to sound perception at all...

When i buy a piece of gear, or evaluate my room, or judge the impact of some modification in my audio system, i dont claim for a universal validity, but i claim and vouch from my own experience and personal history of listening, in my particular room with my particular gear... Reducing that to an A/B/X test is pointless... But testing ourself in some confortable personal environment and with our gear with an A/B test is, like says wisely Paul McGowan of PS audio, a necessary and instructive experiment to improve also ourself ... It is the listener own environment, mastering his own decisions, that are keys to personal improvement in audio and musical experience...

What i speak about is from the subjective point of view of a listener in a process of experiencing music more deeply, and modifying his own perception of sound, with new gear or tweaks etc ,with this goal in mind and with his "own musical perception particular organ" create by his own history...

Reducing that complex and very individual and personal history with ABX tests to some engineering laws of sound emission and perception is only truncating the musical experience to the lowest denominator, it is perhaps good for marketting, or engineering technology, but not a method able to explain musical perception in his relation to sound perception in an individual personal history...

https://www.psaudio.com/askpaul/do-double-blind-tests-work/


the second article post by  thyname go in the same direction...

delkal

Get some reliable witnesses and do a scientific blinded test. Show how you can instantly hear the slightest change in your cables.   Then post it on all of the forums that it can be done.   You will finally put to rest the countless arguments on this subject and you would be famous!

You seem to be among the noisy minority here that places such faith in these tests, so please feel free to conduct your own blind listening tests and share the results here. Please be sure to tell us how the test was conducted.

Most audiophiles don't have much interest in such tests. After all, they're tedious, time consuming, and sometimes yield puzzling results. It's more fun to listen to music.
I've particpated in a few such DBTs. I'd never go to the trouble of actually organizing such a test, though. Provided that you truly want useful results, there's actually much more work to conducting such tests than meets the eye of the casual observer. And the results are useless if the test is not properly conducted.

You often hear people claim that as soon as a new cable was swapped the difference was "Immediately recognized", "Not at all subtle", "Could hear things never heard before" and "Transformed their system". So obviously they would have absolutely no problems picking between the two.............Right?

But the thing is I have never seen any reliable proof where someone can pick one over the other much over 50% when blinded. Going by the post here you would think that at least one superlistener can easily differentiate the cables at least 85% of the time in a blind listening test (and probably in a minute). Does anyone know of a reliable scientific test results where anyone could reliably tell the difference between anything costing over $50 (and I am not talking about using the throw away interconnects that come with lo-fi receivers or ultra thin gauge wires).

Here is your chance guys. Get some reliable witnesses and do a scientific blinded test. Show how you can instantly hear the slightest change in your cables. Then post it on all of the forums that it can be done. You will finally put to rest the countless arguments on this subject and prove to the world that expensive cables are better.  You would be famous!

atdavid

If You claim that you can hear a difference on Your system, all I have to do is show that You cannot reliably detect the difference on Your system.

Perhaps. But to insist that you can base any assertion on the results of a single test or trial is simply absurd. That's why scientific tests rely on more than one test, more than one trial and - typically - more than one subject.

Of course, if you prefer to believe in certain things because of the results of a single test, that's perfectly fine. But in doing so you abandon any claim you may have to being scientific or objective.

atdavid524 posts11-25-2019 10:17amOh look, a person who doesn't understand the concept quoting another person who doesn't understand the concept. I feel so much more enlightened now .... like at least 10lbs.

I was indeed expecting for you to say this about me (nothing new, the same arrogant, condescending, know-it-all behavior to be expected from you), but putting Micheal Lavorgna in the same meter? Really?

Here is another one if so inclined:
https://hal.univ-brest.fr/file/index/docid/842647/filename/APAC_5172.pdf

There are many different ways to skin a chicken, no?

Bravo to those who are starting to question the value of "high end" power cables to the quality of the sound that we hear as an end result.  There is simply no scientific or logical evidence to justify the expenditure of so much money for these units.

Good audio equipment is fitted with excellent  power supplies, which filter and stabilize during the rectification process to DC.  Power supply surges are a different story - but surge suppressors are the proper solution to protect our equipment from such damage.

Most of us are subject to budget limitations - and do not want to waste our hard earned money on "snake oil" solutions.  Science and logic should reign supreme in any technical endeavor - aside from the judgement of our ears - which can be overly subjective and misleading in some cases.  Let the buyer beware!

atdavid, you really don’t understand how independent test and evaluation works, do you? Don’t worry, stick around, you’ll catch on. If tests weren’t independent any yahoo in town could say his test proved some thingamabob or another is a hoax. 🤗

Wrong again Cleeds.

If You claim that you can hear a difference on Your system, all I have to do is show that You cannot reliably detect the difference on Your system. Ditto if a supplier makes a generalization about a group of people with certain characteristics and systems with certain characteristics, and/or a system he is allowed to put together and a group he is allowed to put together. I only need to show lack of detection in that circumstance, which is near ideal for the person making the claim.

Me and prof already schooled you on this at least once, but you keep repeating all the tired and wrong arguments. Are you just going to drag out the same tired and wrong arguments again?

cleeds2,582 posts11-25-2019 10:33am atdavid

Many tests are not needed to disprove a claim, just one ...

That’s completely mistaken, and the claim reflects the blind faith some have in these tests. The simple truth is this: No single test or trial proves anything at all. Only multliple tests - preferably with multiple subjects - are likely to produce meaningful results.

It is easy GK as the person making the claim invariably includes the person making the claim as the test subject or an easily identified group/person, and their system or one they put together as the test system. It is not my fault they make themselves the convenient fish in a barrel.

atdavid

Many tests are not needed to disprove a claim, just one ...

That's completely mistaken, and the claim reflects the blind faith some have in these tests. The simple truth is this: No single test or trial proves anything at all. Only multliple tests - preferably with multiple subjects - are likely to produce meaningful results.

But what if the listener’s ears aren’t all he assumes they are and/or the test system is a hunk of junk? Follow? You thought this was going to be easy, right?

Oh look, a person who doesn't understand the concept quoting another person who doesn't understand the concept. I feel so much more enlightened now .... like at least 10lbs.

A blind test does nothing more than restrict the evaluation process to one thing, and one thing only .... your ears.  It will never cease to be funny audiophiles claiming their hearing is so infallible that they must see what they are reviewing to hear it properly.

https://twitteringmachines.com/the-finite-capacity-of-short-term-memory-or-why-abx-tests-in-hifi-are-silly/

Many tests are not needed to disprove a claim, just one if the test matches the conditions in the claim and given how broad those claims often are in audio, or how specific they are, it is easy to replicate the conditions purported in the claim, right down to the specific test subject.

The great thing about blind testing is it isolates the auditory system as the exclusive "test". Really, that is all it does. It ensures that only the "ears" are used in the testing.

@prof
I thank you for your input and for stepping up to the plate in this oscilloscope v.s. the ear discussion. There is much confusion out there when it comes to audio science, marketing and the ear and what you are saying about the mind playing tricks is true for alot of consumers. For the record, I do believe in science but at the end of the day it does have to process in the point of origination "the brain" and ears and thats why cable companies sell cables. At the end of the day it's the chicken or the egg theory. My hope for the thread was to somehow try to come up with a baseline that would bring the end user closer to their sound expectation at a reasonable dollar to science and ear other and not Marketing magic Crystal B.S. that drives power cord cost from $300.00 to $$.$$$.$$. And yes, at the end of the day people do rely on their ears as the ultimate science.

Thanks for your contribution:)

Cheers 

I have no objection whatsoever to anyone doing blind tests, which they probably don’t anyway, but results of a single blind test - or any test - have no meaning because so many things can go wrong with the test. It’s a complicated system. A lot of things can go wrong and affect results. A lot of people seem to think it’s a slam dunk and case closed. But that’s not true at all. Evidence is the accumulation of the results of many tests, test on different systems and by different persons. This is especially true for negative results, which is what the pseudo skeptics are prognosticating - negative results. Hel-loo! 🤗

Snake  🐍 oil is the lubricant for the tracks on which the train carrying Advanced Audiophiles travels. All aboard the advanced audiophiles train! 🚂 Toot! Toot! Remember the Little Train that Could. I think I can, I think I can, I think I can! 

+1

Anyone who makes such a comment about blind tests can't be taken seriously.

blumartini,
What I wrote isn’t obvious to most on this forum. Most in the cable forum go on the "if I put it in my system and believe I hear a difference, I can trust that method to tell me the truth."

And I didn’t see anything in what you wrote that suggested it was obvious to you. As far as I can tell you don’t voice skepticism about the standard audiophile belief that changing AC cables changes sound, and you have seemingly uncritically praised the Audio Bacon "tests," which doesn’t at all suggest you take the problem of sighted bias seriously.

Maybe Jay didn’t have an exact science but it was most definitely a good starting point to something different than doing the same thing over and over and getting the same results, that is called "insanity".

I can’t parse that paragraph. It’s not like Audio Bacon did anything different. They put cables in to their system, listened, and believed everything they think they heard. What’s different or a "good starting point" about that, in terms of moving the evidence for audiophile AC cables forward. They just took the standard unreliable method and did more of it.

And in the article we find bald assertions like:

Audio Bacon: Aside from practical (and legal) considerations, there’s also the type of solder, connectors, materials, and even technique used. All of these will determine the sound of a power cord.

...with no technical evidential support whatsoever.


Not to mention this disclaimer right below that:

Audio Bacon: Blind tests are pointless for the same reason why the skeptics request them – your mind is always playing tricks on you. – Audio Bacon

Which is a statement of pure anti-scientific ignorance.



You said you don’t believe in magic crystals, yet seem to uncritically accept results based on exactly the same method, a purely subjective "If I try it and think something happened, it happened!"

Why do you seem to drop your critical thinking for AC cables and not new age healing crystals?
I dropped in the thread because it seems you wanted a discussion concerning "The Truth About Power Cords." In which case, it makes sense to ask "where is the theory (that passes muster with other engineers) and objective evidence that AC cables COULD sound different, and the tests controlling for sighted bias that they DO sound different?"

Or, if this is supposed to be a thread about "the truth" only for those who already have accepted the audiophile cable dogma? It seems that’s the case, so maybe it’s best I leave you to it.
Cheers.

@prof 

Just for the record, I don't believe in snake oil, magic crystals, or pixie dust! But it does seem a lot do. What I see is the same ole same ole and nothing is changing. Had it not been for math and science we would still be in a cave.

Maybe Jay didn't have an exact science but it was most definitely a good starting point to something different than doing the same thing over and over and getting the same results, that is called "insanity". So other than magic crystals do you have anything you can bring to the table other than observation of the obvious?

Uh, noone in history has ever bought a $17K power cord. You’re barking at the moon. 🌝 

If you buy a $17k power cord I know everything. I need to know about you.

prof, I suspect your results were because you didn’t implement the proper rigor and controls. Hel-loo!

blumartini

What I can say is that Jay Luong's 27 Best Audiophile Power Cables has been one of the best if not the best attempt to put things somewhat into perspective in regards to the manufactures, models, and prices as well as what to expect at there particular value proposition.

Well, if you think tests done with an utter lack of rigor or controls for his own imagination are "the best..."

..then I've got some magic health crystals to sell you .  They are evaluated the same way.

blumartini, have you ever tried to blind test between audiophile cables and a "normal" competently designed cables? (E.g. correct gauge for equipment etc).  I have.  It was very enlightening.  When I knew which cable was in use I was sure the sound OBVIOUSLY changed.   But when I didn't know which was being used, funny how those OBVIOUS ANYONE COULD HEAR IT changes vanished.  Human perception and cognitive biases are pretty wild.   The stance "If I heard it then it's true and my ears can't be wrong!" is a popular one among audiophiles.   But it's up to you if you want to treat audio in essentially a form of religion or not.

If so, have fun discussing how many thousands of dollars to spend on AC cables.

mikepowellaudio,

Making a power cable that is able to degrade sound does not prove that an audiophile-grade power cable will improve sound compared to a generic one of equal gauge. The only thing you proved is that you know how to make a bad power cable.

I should also be able to make one that degrades your sonic as well , right ? Yes , I can , through my trial and error process, I know some things that will inherently degrade the sonic, collapse the soundstage roll off highs, kill dynamics, etc.. This may be easier for people to hear since it sits in the glass half empty arena and it seems some minds stay there..

Perfect. +1 mikepowellaudio

OK, so to respond to my post, I simply threw it out there, you may do with it what you want, but I am not afraid to double blind my cables. I dont think I have all the answers, I am not a scientist , I do believe there are things we experience as humans that can NOT be measured with any existing thingamajigger the physicists and scientists may have, even if it does go PING. The funny part is everyone is so stuck here. Its a phenomenon to me . Like we made a stick line in the dirt and put the chickens beak in it. The whole 50 miles of crap wire with noise, can easily be summed up so everyone can understand how a power cord could make a difference, in two words. . Filtering Cable. um....., is that so hard to imagine.. ? now depending on how much noise a filtering cable can remove will also affect the amount of noise on the ground plane of a piece of gear., this is because the safety ground is tied to the signal ground plane in 90% of pieces. Silly idea if you ask me , but I love differential design. Power supply noise gets on the ground plane from leakage current as well. This is why the more expensive gear where they have spent much time and effort at creating a low leakage, therefore low noise Psup , sound better and get less of a benefit from a filtering power cord. Ive decided to start really getting down to the nitty gritty if we want to talk cables. If people dont believe cables work, lets start with the microphone cable. to test this area, I recenty purchased a matched set of very flat measuremant microphones and a high fallotin mic pre. What I did not realize is that most if not all vocal mics have a rising frequency response in the higher frequency. Very simply put, the "coloration" starts with the microphone. .. this is a whole other discussion , but I ran recording tests this weekend with Mogami and My pure silver foil as a microphone cable . The difference is not subtle. Im also thinking a good way to prove the power cord thing is for me to make a power cord that will collapse your soundstage , in other words if power cords can change the sound of a rig, which they can. I should also be able to make one that degrades your sonic as well , right ? Yes , I can , through my trial and error proces, I know some things that will inherently degrade the sonic, collapse the soundstage roll off highs, kill dynamics, etc.. This may be easier for people to hear since it sits in the glass half empty arena and it seems some minds stay there.. So anyways , have a great Sunday and happy listening !

dynaflex4 is a long-term know nothing and stalker. But he’s a good guy.

atdavid: Not to worry about GK.  Two things you can count on.  One...he hawks this forum like a termite on a sawdust floor and will respond to just about any post within 5 minutes.  Second...he will defend voo-doo audio magic as if you were challenging his heritage.

He is not a bad guy...just not one that believes science has any place in the manufacture of audio accessories; and offers personal insults in rebuttal.  

   "....What it does not address is differential voltages between equipment locally, usually most influenced by grounds, though ground line interaction is possible. Do you need $20K of power cords to solve this? No, $100 of copper strapping between equipment grounds will do far more. There is the potential for power cord to interconnect EMI, but again you don't need a super expensive cord to fix..."

atdavid,

Good point. Circuit designers work hard to achieve a common (Star) ground point in their equipment designs and then we undo their best efforts by plugging the pieces of equipment into various outlets and power conditioners in the room without regard for establishing a common system ground. The Star grounding concept should be used at the system level and copper strapping is one way to achieve that.

I firmly believe that pleasure should be the primary factor in deciding how lovers of pure sound reproduction should spend their money...

" I firmly believe that science should be the primary factor in deciding how lovers of pure sound reproduction should spend their money and set their priorities in making their purchases"

I firmly believe that "lovers of pure sound reproduction" should spend their money anyway they please. What are you 12?  

For me DH Labs AC Red Wave bulk wire is a great cable with impresive price to quality ratio.
For about 130 US dollars you can have a VERY good 4 feet power cord.
Of course, you have to buy separately the plugs and make by your self, but its not a big investment to risk. 

And what magic claims are those, Mr. Bluster? What have I done now? By the way, I knew you couldn’t answer my first question, the one about magic claims for cables and power cords. Because there aren’t any. Duh! For someone who doesn’t read my posts you seem a little bit obsessed with me, just an observation. My suggestion - take a long cold shower.

Side note - I broke two of your sacred laws of physics today and it’s not even dinnertime. How does that make you feel? Angry, I bet. 😡

Well admittedly they are nothing like the magic claims you make for your products GK, but no one's takes yours seriously so ......

What so-called magic claims by cable or power cord manufacturers are you referring to? I suspect you are making this up just so you can go off on one of your pseudo-scientist rampages, atdavid, Ethan or whoever.

https://youtu.be/VEaLpslkwDE

The problem with most cable claims, at least from the MFR claims is that they always work. 


The argument w.r.t. the 50 feet of ROMEX before the plug sounds good and for some aspects of performance is valid. What it does not address is differential voltages between equipment locally, usually most influenced by grounds, though ground line interaction is possible. Do you need $20K of power cords to solve this? No, $100 of copper strapping between equipment grounds will do far more.  There is the potential for power cord to interconnect EMI, but again you don't need a super expensive cord to fix.


W.r.t. speaker cables, inductance and capacitance can make some differences at high frequencies but so can humidity and likely larger effects unless you are running electrostatics in which case it would be significant. Gauge and inductance can make differences in response of 1/10s of a db depending on cable and speaker and varied with the speaker impedance.  Audible ... Highly questionable and again, doesn't take $10k.  And again, the claim that This cable will make all systems sound better is unlikely to be factual at all as results are highly system dependent.


Last, for all the magic claims, there really is no magic. Resistance, inductance and capacitance will be dominant, skin resistance can be ruled out quickly with stranded wire, transmission line effects only play when you have a very wide bandwidth unstable amplifier, and dielectric absorption is easily measured and quantified. Talks of silver, copper, cryo, geometry, etc. are just marketing to impress those that do not understand how meaningless that is, and that if those things really made a difference it would be easily measured.


If you do a search on a technical claim and it Only shows up hits related to audiophiles you know it is probably bull.  Industries where performance means money or the difference between working or not (many scientific endeavours), and employ people who can track down sources of error, don't worry about these things. 


One caveat is much expectation is that a product is designed competently. I can be confident my Rohde and Schwartz spectrum analyzer was likely designed properly or at least as performance parameters were properly verified. Boutique audio gear not so much. Many use linear power supply topologies that were state of the art 50 years ago.



Summary: I know pretty well how cables could impact results, don't believe most impacts are actually audible, know that some things that should not be audible are due to poor design, and know that no cable component can be universally better.

@geoffkait
Lol Man, your off the chain!