2. cables
  3. 166070-159469

What do we hear when we change the direction of a wire?

Douglas Self wrote a devastating article about audio anomalies back in 1988. With all the necessary knowledge and measuring tools, he did not detect any supposedly audible changes in the electrical signal. Self and his colleagues were sure that they had proved the absence of anomalies in audio, but over the past 30 years, audio anomalies have not disappeared anywhere, at the same time the authority of science in the field of audio has increasingly become questioned. It's hard to believe, but science still cannot clearly answer the question of what electricity is and what sound is! (see article by A.J.Essien).

For your information: to make sure that no potentially audible changes in the electrical signal occur when we apply any "audio magic" to our gear, no super equipment is needed. The smallest step-change in amplitude that can be detected by ear is about 0.3dB for a pure tone. In more realistic situations it is 0.5 to 1.0dB'". This is about a 10% change. (Harris J.D.). At medium volume, the voltage amplitude at the output of the amplifier is approximately 10 volts, which means that the smallest audible difference in sound will be noticeable when the output voltage changes to 1 volt. Such an error is impossible not to notice even using a conventional voltmeter, but Self and his colleagues performed much more accurate measurements, including ones made directly on the music signal using Baxandall subtraction technique - they found no error even at this highest level.

As a result, we are faced with an apparently unsolvable problem: those of us who do not hear the sound of wires, relying on the authority of scientists, claim that audio anomalies are BS. However, people who confidently perceive this component of sound are forced to make another, the only possible conclusion in this situation: the electrical and acoustic signals contain some additional signal(s) that are still unknown to science, and which we perceive with a certain sixth sense.

If there are no electrical changes in the signal, then there are no acoustic changes, respectively, hearing does not participate in the perception of anomalies. What other options can there be?

Regards.
anton_stepichev

Showing 3 responses by linnvolk

linnvolk
91 posts
 
 Blind listening test subjects are usually allowed as much time as they need.
@cleeds, the listener can take all the time desired during the round.  Requiring the same time between rounds is to make sure that the same time elapses between rounds whether switching cable directions or not.  A counterexample is a recent(?) test that Rick Beato either performed or mentioned in which the respondents were to attempt to tell the difference between a "cd" quality and a "high-resolution" quality recording of the same music.  Some of the respondents were clever enough to intentionally game the system by realizing that the larger files took longer to load.  Even if not intentionally "cheating," the differing load times lent an unwanted bias to the test.  (I think you probably understand all this and perhaps did not read my post carefully.)

I concede that there are some details that would need to be attended to, but still maintain that a fairly simple test along the lines I described would be enlightening and perhaps conclusive.  To reject the hypothesis that one cannot hear directionality, multiple persons who make the claim to be able to hear would have to be tested and found not to be able to make the right call a statistically significant amount of the time.  However, if we can find one person who can consistently tell the difference, then I would say that that "proves" that some can hear the difference.  (And I doubt that I would be one of those.)

linnvolk
91 posts
 
A simple test, done under controlled conditions with witnesses and published for all to read in a reputable journal would help. Person A has cables for which he/she believes she/he can hear directionality in his/her system. Person B comes to where this system is, with witnesses. Person A selects the music and listens to everything blindfolded or otherwise screened from seeing which direction the cabling is hooked up and when/whether the cabling direction is switched.  Round 1: Person B attaches the cabling and follows Person A’s direction on what to play through what device(s). When Person A is satisfied with this round, Round 2 begins. Person B switches the cabling direction (or not) and follows Person A’s directions again on what to play through what device(s) until Person A has heard enough. Person B then switches the cabling direction (or not).  Round 3 begins...and so on. Enough rounds are conducted to give the desired confidence level per the “Student’s t Test” for rejecting hypotheses, and to satisfy Person A (perhaps).  Person A keeps notes and at the end has to state for each round transition, whether the direction of cabling was changed or not. 
linnvolk
91 posts
 
@cleeds,

Your "simple test" is too simple and what you describe are not controlled conditions. For example, your test isn’t double-blind and doesn’t allow for quick switching, requirements that experts in the field (Johnson, Toole) insist are necessary.

My “simple test” was not intended to be a full specification. I have a non-audiophile life, too. An obvious requirement is for there to be a controlled amount of time, the same whether switching or not, between rounds. Someone else can fill in all the missing bits.
The point is that it would be fairly simple to do a test on the home ground/system of the person who claims to be able to hear the difference. Proper witnessing and test design would insure a satisfactory result. The person can either hear the difference with statistical accuracy without the benefit of knowing how the cables are hooked up or or they cannot. Proper witnessing removes the chance of fraud, and suitable repeatability is established.
Finding a proponent and a detractor and a few witnesses who are all interested foremost in the truth (and who have the time to spare) is the challenge. I volunteer as a witness for any such test conducted in the Houston area, as I am qualified to be neither a proponent nor a detractor.
More to discover