In my years of audiophilia I have crossed swords with my brother many times regarding that which is real, and not real, in terms of differeces heard and imagined. He holds a Masters Degree in Education, self taught himself regarding computers, enough to become the MIS Director for a school system, and early in life actually self taught himself to arrange music, from existing compositions, yet he denys that any differece exists in the 'sound' of cables--to clarify, he denies that anyone can hear a difference in an ABX comparison. Recently I mentioned that I was considering buying a new Lexicon, when a friend told me about the Exemplar, a tube modified Dennon CD player of the highest repute, video wise, which is arguably one of the finest sounding players around. When I told him of this, here was his response: "Happily I have never heard a CD player with "grainy sound" and, you know me, I would never buy anything that I felt might be potentially degraded by or at least made unnecessarily complex and unreliable by adding tubes."
Here is the rub, when cd players frist came out, I owned a store, and was a vinyl devotee, as that's all there was, and he saw digital as the panacea for great change; "It is perfect, it's simply a perfect transfer, ones and zero's there is no margin for error," or words to that effect. When I heard the first digital, I was appalled by its sterility and what "I" call 'grainy' sound. Think of the difference in cd now versus circa 1984. He, as you can read above resists the notion that this is a possibility. We are at constant loggerheads as to what is real and imagined, regarding audio, with him on the 'if it hasn't been measured, there's no difference', side of the equation. Of course I exaggerate, but just the other day he said, and this is virtually a quote, "Amplifiers above about a thousand dollars don't have ANY qualitative sound differences." Of course at the time I had Halcro sitting in my living room and was properly offended and indignant. Sibling rivalry? That is the obvious here, but this really 'rubs my rhubarb', as Jack Nicholson said in Batman. Unless I am delusional, there are gargantual differences, good and bad, in audio gear. Yet he steadfastly sticks to his 'touch it, taste it, feel it' dogma. Am I losing it or is he just hard headed, (more than me)? What, other than, "I only buy it for myself," is the answer to people like this? (OR maybe US, me and you other audio sickies out there who spend thousands on minute differences? Let's hear both sides, and let the mud slinging begin!
Text books, and the study they relate to, teach us how to learn, as well as some facts and techniques. Most of the electronics technology current when I went to school is obsolete today, but the open-minded but systematic approach to learning that I was taught is still valid, and, at last report, Ohm's law still applies. One cannot chase after every fool idea that comes down the pike, and science can help identify the ones that just might be valid for further study. Could science miss a good one? Sure. But some crazy guy will try it anyway, and become a hero.
Because the most significant variable is the ear/brain processor and nothing that is inherent in the equipment we listen to; try getting that across to subjective audiophiles. Audiophilia is a faith-based activity these days... No it doesn't all sound the same, but most of the time the differences are so insignificant as to make the whole thing beside the point.
Pabelson: Most EE's know what their text books have taught them
And textbooks teach quite a lot about circuits & circuit design -- don't they... Despite what we (consumers -- not EE's involved in audio circuits) know or don't know about them:)!
I'm NOT about to type out the novels that i did last time all of this "evidence" was introduced. Rsbeck failed to respond to any / all of my previous rebuttals on the subject because he couldn't refute the information that i used as a reference. That's because my reference was his reference. Refuting my statements would be the same as impugning his own reference point, hence his silence.
Since that thread has since been deleted ( hmmmm... wonder why??? ), i'm not going to argue with a brick wall. He keeps arguing the same thing, over and over again, which only covers a very narrow part of the big picture. When it is repeatedly demonstrated to him that cable bandwidth is directly related to the impedance of the speaker load that it is terminated with, he seems to go deaf / refuse to face the facts.
Pabelson: Most EE's know what their text books have taught them. The smart ones are the ones that use the text book as a guideline and then learn on their own. This is how technology and our knowledge base is furthered. If we relied on past technology and accepted "perfectly understood" theories as being the final word, the world would still be flat and the Sun would be revolving around the Earth.
If your brother cant hear the difference of the sound of your cables, and your Halcro, I would consider him, Still very intelligent, but I would suggest,for him to see Ear specialist, He might have a hearing problem.
Nevertheless, that doesn't mean timing is not an issue where differences in cables are concerned. And, I don't think data presented has any bearings on these.
Nor, does it mean rolling off is an issue.
And, how do you remain objective between siblings. That's asking the impossible. *tongue in cheek*
Sean, It's funny that you should suggest the 'test'. Years ago, I mentioned to him that cleaning all the connections of his system contact points, and applying Michael Dayton-Wright's Tweak, would improve the sound, and he really got a chuckle out of that. So, challenged, I did just that, (Kind of Tom Sawyer like huh?) and he was stunned at the difference. Of course, the contacts were filthy, so the largest improvement probably came from the cleaning rather than the Tweak, nontheless for a couple of months he was more receptive to some of the thoughts of a 'high end' nature. But as many have pointed out, he's happy, hell let him be.
Viggen: I claim no formal expertise in this area. I would invite anyone to print out the posts of Sean, Rsbeck, and myself, and show them to a degreed electrical engineer. Ask him (or her) which ones are on target.
I'd also apologize for my part in hijacking this thread. My only aim was to correct some technical misinformation.
12 gauge zip cord -- frequency response: Minimum is 26.8dB at 20kHz and maximum is 26.93dB -- a total deviation of 0.13dB. The HF rolloff between 10kHz and 20kHz is 0.1dB.
http://sound.westhost.com/cable-z.htm
Table 4: Frequency Response Comparison of 50 ft cable lengths
Sound King 12AWG (Zip Cord) -- Total loss at 20Khz when driven into a 4 ohm load... -.745 db
The psycho-acoustic data shows that for pure tones at 16kHz the smallest average detectable difference in level is 3.05 dB. The findings were based on individuals 20 to 24 years old that had normal hearing to 20 kHz (See note 2). This is what might be called the best of conditions for hearing differences.
Audio, July 1994, "Speaker cables: Measurements Vs Psycho-acoustic data" by Edgar Villchur.
So, a .1 db "roll-off" between 10Khz and 20Khz is clearly inaudible.
Whatever is one's problem with 12 gauge Zip Cord, the notion of audible "roll-off" is unfounded. Anything based on the premise of audible roll-off is similarly flawed.
It is like saying the Loch Ness Monster has bad breath from eating seafood.
If you fail to produce old Nessie, your guesses about her breath are immaterial, irrelevant, and unfounded.
Tvad: Remember when I said there were too many variables? I meant it. There's no such thing as "theoretically not a problem." Either there's a substantial rolloff or there isn't, and you'd have to crunch the numbers to be sure. The numbers, by the way, would include the output impedance of the amp and the impedance curve of the speakers (not just the nominal impedance).
Assuming that the output impedance of your amp is reasonably close to typical for solid-state amps, however, I wouldn't expect HF rolloff to be a problem for 30 ft. of 11AWG wire. But that's an educated guess, not a fact.
Tvad: There are too many variables to answer your question precisely. One speaker manufacturer which takes a common-sense approach to cables (Axiom) recommends not using 14AWG for lengths longer than 25 feet. That's probably reasonable advice, and suggests that it would take lengths substantially longer than 25 feet to produce audible rolloff. But amp and speaker impedances factor into this. If you're trying to drive electrostatics with an SET, all bets are off. (But then, if you're trying to drive electrostatics with an SET, it is safe to assume that flat frequency response is not your highest priority!)
Virtually everything that Sean has said about speaker cables above is wrong. He is right that zipcord will suffer a measurable rolloff in the treble, but so will any cable. That rolloff will increase with resistance. (Contrary to his claims, skin effect will be negligible, because we are dealing only with audio frequencies.)
But he really demonstrates his lack of understanding when he makes these assertions in a post suggesting a comparison between Nordost and 10AWG zipcord. The zipcord will have *less* rolloff than Nordost Reference cable, because Nordost cables have higher resistance. Valhalla, for example, has a resistance of 0.0026 ohms/ft, the same as 14AWG copper--which is what Valhalla is. Of course, Rsbeck is right that the rolloff in either case is too small to be audible--unless we are using extreme lengths, in which case the zipcord will have flatter frequency response.
Sean, Through the years I have done some listening tests with him and proven that I personally do hear differences, that perhaps he doesn't, or more likely doesn't care to, but to no avail. He isn't an audiophile, and I just need to let that go. I guess there's a part of me, like maybe with you and your wife or friend(s) who you WISH you could share this with, but they just have no desire for it. This whole thread was actually a metaphor for the whole of the group, and the frustration that SOME may feel from loving the chase, and the differences we hear, and wanting to share, and getting stonewalled by them. But thanks for the advice, as usual, good advice from a pro. Larry
All of the figures that i provided was extrapolated from the data that Rod Elliott provided on his website. These were the tests that you used as a point of reference. If you've got a problem with the figures quoted, argue with the guy that provided your points of reference. Don't ask me to disprove the info that you've already stated that you accept to be accurate. You either believe it or you don't, which is it? Sean >
It would be more accurate to say that Zip Cord is down .1 db at 20 Khz.
Like I said -- it is doubtful that this is audible.
It is even less scientific to make further extrapolations such as this causes Zip Cord to sound full, or whatever.
You have no double-blind listening tests to confirm these projections.
So you have guesses based on unproven theories based on something that hasn't even been proven audible.
It is also rather dishonest to say that the link I provided in the other thread helped your case -- the person posted spectral analysis and contradicted you and you claimed he really agreed with you but didn't want to admit it. So, you also claim to be a mind reader and you've proven to be rather impervious to contradictory information.
Hmmmm --- I guess if you fail to back your claims and I fail to engage you further on this topic -- you can claim victory again.
>>In case you can't remember, you weren't able to refute any of the scientifically derived claims that i made in that thread.<<
ROFL. Yeah, that's the ticket. I recall you claiming that when people disagree with you it actually confirms that you're right -- and you posted a bunch of other incomplete misleading garbage in that thread.
If you have spectral analysis to back up your comments, let's see them.
Otherwise, this is a lot of hot air and urban mythology.
Rsbeck: We went through all of this garbage concerning loudspeaker cable non-linearities in another recent thread. In case you can't remember, you weren't able to refute any of the scientifically derived claims that i made in that thread. The fact that i used the information that you yourself presented as evidence should refresh your memory a bit. As such, trying to use that same incorrect info as a point of reference in another thread will not fly, nor is it ethical to try and do so. That point was already proven wrong and you're standing on fallow ground.
As far as Nordost goes, it will not suffer as much increased high frequency loss due to skin effect as the zip cord does. This is due to the differences in the size and shape of the conductors used. This is true even though the Nordost is a cable that exhibits a less than desirable amount of inductance and a higher impedance, much like zip cord.
The reason that the zip cord performs poorer than the Nordost at high frequencies is due to a "double whammy". That is, the zip cord is both high in inductance and high in skin effect. Combine the two and you have increased high frequency losses. As described in that other thread, these losses could come into play as low as appr 2.2 KHz. Exactly where it did occur in a specific system would be directly related to the nominal impedance of the speaker being used.
Taking the measured responses as derived from that same article and applying it to various impedance speaker loads, the -3 dB point of zip cord would appear at 67 KHz with it being down - .2 dB at 22 KHz. The - 3dB point would be appr 33 KHz and -.2 dB at 11 KHz with a 4 ohm load. The -3 dB point would be at 16.5 KHz and -.2 dB at 5.5 KHz with a 2 ohm load. The -3 dB would be at appr 8.2 KHz and -.2 of a dB at 2.75 KHz with a 1 ohm load. Obviously, a -3 dB response at 8 KHz with significant deviations below that frequency would be highly audible to say the least, but this is under worst case scenario of a 1 ohm load. As we can see, lower impedance speakers introduce TWICE the amount of high frequency roll-off into the equation when using a poorly designed speaker cable, so keep that in mind.
One should remember that these reductions in linearity WILL occur IF the impedance of the speaker varies within the audible bandwidth. This means that the power transfer characteristics of such a cable will compound the problem of power transfer as the impedance of the speaker itself varies. This is why certain cables with certain electrical characteristics may sound slightly different when connected to slightly different loudspeaker loads i.e. the power delivery potential of each amplifier will respond differently to the individual combo presented to it.
It is for this reason that we should be using a speaker cable with a very low and consistent nominal impedance over a wide bandwidth. Taking such an approach reduces the potential for deviations with ANY type of loudspeaker load and offers the potential for the most consistent performance possible.
It is this treble roll-off that causes most heavy gauge zip cord tends to sound "warmer" and "fuller" than some esoteric audiophile speaker cabling that was designed with a higher level of engineering and signal transfer theory behind it. Whether or not this is audible will depend on the listening skills of the end user and individual components that the system is comprised of. One should bare in mind that this example was based on a worst case scenario i.e. a 1 ohm loudspeaker load. A speaker with a nominal impedance of 2 ohms would show an appr loss of -4.8 dB's at 22 KHz, a 4 ohm load would show a loss of appr -2.4 dB's at 22 KHz and an 8 ohm load would show a loss of appr 1.2
The reason why the Nordost lacks bass / warmth has to do with the higher nominal impedance, which is about 120 ohms or so. This very high impedance is what reduces the effective power transfer of the cable. In plain English, less current flow equals less low frequency output. On most poorly designed speakers that utilize some type of vented alignment, this lack of low frequency output can actually help to balance out an otherwise "slow" & "bloated" presentation by shifting the tonal balance upwards in frequency. Then again, this is strictly a "band-aid" approach i.e. fixing one problem with another known problem. Nobody with a degree in electronics would ever think about using a 100+ ohm cable between a device with a 1 ohm output impedance and a load that is nominally 8 ohms or so. That is, if they were trying to maintain a high level of system linearity.
None of this type of info is "new" or part of a "technological breakthrough". It's simply based on the laws of physics and the common understanding of signal propagation that most electronic professional's should know and understand. If it was "new" and on the "cutting edge of technology", i surely wouldn't know about it. The fact that i do know about it and can explain it should tell you something about how out of touch most "wire & cable guru's" and "wire & cable naysayers" really are.
Other than that, my comments were directed at identifying speaker cabling, not power cords. Please bring your ABX knife and power cord comments with you to the proper thread, as a knife is out of place at a gun-fight. As previously mentioned, your original arguments were already shot down in that other thread. Sean >
If someone wants to prove he/she can hear the difference between two power cords, the answer isn't to administer a test to the non-believer under the flawed premise that if the non-believer is honest, he/she will admit to hearing differences. The answer is for the BELIEVER to take a properly administered ABX test to prove that he/she can hear the differences he/she claims to hear. Otherwise, you've got the makings of a Monty Python sketch whereby if the non-believer fails to hear the difference, you claim victory by claiming the non-believer was not honest.
>>Nordost lacks warmth and tends to accent the upper midrange and treble region, making it just the opposite of heavy gauge zip cord.<<
Again, if Nordost accents the upper midrage and treble region, this should be easy to measure and quantify. Instead of throwing around this kind of verbiage, give the measurements and then we can see if Nordost is the "opposite" of Zip Cord over the audio band.
LOL. If you call rolling off dipping at 20Khz by an amount that is most likely inaudible. It is a joke to call that "coloration." This is misleading, incomplete information. Give the real numbers over the audio band rather than starting urban myths.
The fact remains that high-end audio is not for the masses. This fact is substantiated by the incredible growth and interest in MP3. The average person is happy with this level of performance. I believe that most people do hear the difference when subjected to good equipment. For whatever reason, most have little interest or it is of low priority. Unfortunately, the acceptance of mediocrity drives the retail market which in turn, gives us our source material. There is a growing concern that the MP3 format will eventually replace conventional CD's. SCARY! Even as audiophiles, we accept mediocrity in this area. As an audiophile community, are we really doing anything to advance the production of SACD's or better sounding CDs? The masses have at least one thing right....they don't have a separate collection of CD's that only sound good in the car.:-)
Lrsky: Why not set up a demo that will prove your brother to be wrong and then have him eat his own words after listening with his own ears? With all of your expertise and connections in the field of electronics and audio, finding a suitable combo of gear that will demonstrate the differences of altering just one variable within a system shouldn't be hard to do at all.
Since he is a "naysayer", i would suggest using speaker cabling as a test. If you can find some inexpensive 10 gauge zip cord and some Nordost, the differences should be highly noticeable right off the bat. While Fulton Gold would work better than the generic heavy gauge zip cord, i was trying to make this as simple and inexpensive as possible in case others wanted to try such a test themselves.
The key here is to make the listener doing the comparison extremely familiar with the sound of the system and recording being used prior to introducing the variable to be tested. This allows them to think that they will know what they will hear based on previous exposure. Given that they are already familiar with the sonic traits of the recording and the system, any differences that are easily detected will seem quite pronounced to them at this point.
If you want to take advantage of your brother's belief in AB testing, use it against him. By carefully "rigging" the results, you can achieve the results that you want. That is, IF your brother is both a reasonable listener and honest.
Play a selected song or portion of a song for him using the heavy guage zip cord as the speaker cabling. Then act like you swap speaker cabling, but don't really do it. Play that portion of the song again. Then pretend to swap speaker cables again, but don't. This will give him three times the exposure to the one set of speaker cables that he would have normally had, further aquainting him with the sonics of the system. After three identical presentations, it will also lull him into a false sense of security that there is no difference between the cables.
On the fourth try, use the Nordost cabling. Not only should the differences be markedly noticed, but he should have a hard time denying that there isn't an audible difference. As a side note, i was able to identify the differences between 16 gauge and 12 gauge Monster Cable during a similar demo at a local Best Buy. I did so using songs & equipment that i had never heard before with 100% accuracy, so this test should be even easier to achieve positive test results with. Like i said though, this would require your brother to be honest. In such a test, even an unskilled listener should be able to tell the difference.
As a side note, the use of non-locking banana plugs makes speaker cable changes the fastest, most convenient method. This requires the least amount of time as you can simply pull and insert the new cabling. The use of at least 8' - 10' of speaker cabling will also tend to further highlight the differences as shorter lengths introduce less of a sonic signature into the equation. As i've mentioned before though, longer speaker cabling lengths are only a big deal when the cables themselves are not properly designed.
The reason that i picked the cabling that i did is that zip cord tends to roll-off the top end and lends a much warmer, fuller sound to the presentation. Nordost lacks warmth and tends to accent the upper midrange and treble region, making it just the opposite of heavy gauge zip cord. Both are poorly designed cables in the fact that their nominal impedance is appr 100 ohms, but due to the differences in conductor geometry, they tend to shape the audible region in contrasting fashion. Both are "coloured" cables and we are taking advantage of those colourations to demonstrate that audible differences are discernable. Sean >
Naive....Sorry I have a new ergonomic keyboard, and am trying to adjust, plus I am not sure that my spelling is always correct, and being a usually good speller, I don't check as I should, though I outght to start. This has run it's course, and I should leave my brother alone, let him buy his multi thousand dollar camera equipment without comment... To each his own. He's a good guy, a good brother, just annoying to a hobbiest such as me sometimes. Thanks again for the responses.
I don't think it is naive to pick one's gear based on sound rather than reputation. I don't think anyone argued otherwise. Not even sure how this came up.
I don't know that this is an arguement worth persuing. If a battle cannot be won, and there is nothing to gain by engaging in it, what is the point?
I have an IQ in the low double digits, actually the high teens, but that does not affect my ability to hear. That inability arises from another issue. It is not uncommon for people to be educated beyond their intelligence, not that this is the case with your brother, but someone coming from the perspective of a self-proclaimed knowledgable person is not going to be dissuaded by facts.
Claiming to hear a difference, or claiming not to hear a difference, are not proofs. Truth is not subjective, but perception is, and it is impossible to alter a persons perception of an event that by definition must be past.
Your brother could post the question: Why go people claim to hear differences. His experience is his own, to have and to interpret, and from which to draw a conclusion. Having done so does not garauntee the correct outcome.
Unfortuantely the only person who is always right is me, but that doesn't do anything to alleviate your situation.
Rsbek, You are right about the 'ignorance is bliss' comment on me. But to clarify; since I rarely read, other than people talk about using 'hospital grade' plugs, on power cords, as to why they are different--what I am saying here is that I personally, that is just me, not you or the other posters here, don't have to know why something is as it is--and I can still enjoy it. As I mentioned, when some products were sent to me, with great reputations, yet failed to 'sound' better than others of lesser credentials, (and it may have had to do with the overall synergism, like so many things in audio) I picked, for my design, the one that sounded better to make the LSA. That is one area where many designers and I disagree. To me it's all about the end result and sound, not the reputation of a given product. I guess you could say that's niiave (sp), but for me its just, making a decision, (my taste again) of what sounds better. Ultimately the market will decide if my decisions are correct. But, regardless of the 'why's' better sounding is better. I don't need a white paper for confirmation. Maybe I am completely out to lunch there, but it's how I personally evaluate. All of you are right here, forget what your brother says, he is no more right or wrong, just has a different opinion, and I guess I am so arrogant, that if he doesn't agree with me, he's being obstenant.Who' more hard headed, him or me? HA! All of us audiophiles push the proverbial rock up the hill, when it comes to disinterested friends, it's just that with him, I guess I'd like to share my enthusiasm, rather than explain or fight over it. Thanks again.
The above thread shows why market pickings for the latest, greatest gizmo and twist remains good. There is so much hype and hand waving in consumer audio that it is difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff. And many of the customers are relatively ignorant, but very committed. And there is bit of anti-scientific method bias: How dare anyone try to measure their artistic sensibility -- one even suggested it's like trying to measure god. I love it; reminds me of the character in the BBC "Keeping Up Appeareances" who wants assurance that used electricity is not being distributed to her house.
I remain convinced that what I can hear can be measured in terms of power bandwidth, transcient response, acoustic dispersion, and so forth, and that there are many measureable differences that I cannot hear.
Now I know that exactly 25 billion and three angels can dance on the head of a pin, and I feel sorry for you if can't see that.
I debated 'outing' a personal experience, ie my brother, until I (probably) rationalized, that this is an issue many of us audio crazies have, with friends and acquataintences. But as I read some of the great posts here I realize that I have forgotten one of my first pieces of advice to my new audiophile customers: "Don't expect your friends to like or even understand your enthusiasm over this, You'll put on Sarah Vaughn recorded at Tivoli Gardens in 1962 live, and it will sound wonderful, and they will yawn and ask, 'you got any beer?' You can't transfer enthusiasm, or in my case fanaticism to others.The one post here, talking about the 'smug' attitude was almost a perfect balm, as it captured the exact feeling and moment. Thanks for the posts, this is great.
This is a funny thread, Rsbeck don't mind Lrsky's touchy feely thin skin. He just uses that "no reason to get nasty" tactic to put you on the defensive. He likes to be in charge of the thread.
Lrsky you will note name drops more than a teenage girl to somehow convey to us all that he is an expert. Something his brother clearly has latched onto this chain and jerks him continously with it.
The fact is lay people can hear important differences in sound 99% of the time. Difference between power cords etc is usually not profound except to the negative and if your equipment is that marginal get new equipment.
As for superiority, its more a function of repitition, people who play tennis will kick a non-tennis playing audiophiles ass all over the court and while the audiophile is buying drinks he/she may not be interested in the isometric stringing of the tennis players racket which really helped increase the top spin from their overhand.
The key is to recognize when you're to obtuse to win a debate and withdraw with dignity. The "joy" of competing with Larry is one I would turn down if I was his brother, well actually he turned down the chance to compete with me. But that's another matter between 2 commercial posters.
Not everyone wants to sit and listen to music, thus the term non-audiophiles. Some of the most passionate people I know with the biggest collections of music, enjoy it as a background part of their lives. So we have to leave some latitude for peoples interests beyond "lifelike" reproduction of a CD or LP.
"Audio is particularly intimidating for some reason, perhaps because it is so expensive and not easily accessible to the laymen".....
I can finally comment now that I have stopped laughing at this comment. (whiping the tears, 1 sec)
Rule #1 of audio; Every guy believes he's born with all the stereo knowledge he'll ever need.
Audio is not expensive for the layman to get a layman's system. Audio is expensive for audiophiles because they engage in this behavior...
"I never questioned the outcome with caps etc, or wiring, regardless of where it led, I only accepted the findings, as sounding either better or not as good".
This is exactly how to build a one year of experience twenty times over resume, instead of twenty years of experience.
BTW KUDOS; to RsBeck and Tympani for their comments and insights and those who chimed in supporting their statements.
I would have to agree whole heartedly with Rsbeck. Your brother is trying, with much success to get under your skin and into your head. So much so, that you need to gain confirmation in this forum to justify what you already knew to be true. If he can't or won't acknowledge that there is a discernable difference in equipment, then that's his deal. If you can hear the difference and gain satisfaction from this hobby/addiction, then relish in it and appreciate it for what it is. Leave this futile and endless conversation with your brother alone and move on.
I have a dear friend who is actually a singer and a pretty good one at that. He once made a comment to me as we were discussing my audio gear and as I was trying to explain all of the little nuances and tonalities. He responded that he was sure that his Bose Wave Radio sounded as good and was just fine. I wanted to get into this grand discussion with him until it hit me and I realized something after all of these years in this hobby; 1. We are a small and selective group; 2. Most people can't or won't listen for the things that we do; 3. Most people put on music on their system strictly as background and don't sit there to listen and enjoy as we do; 4. Most of your friends who aren't into it will not be your friend if you belabor them with this diatribe; 5. Most importantly: If someone like my friend thinks that his Wave Radio is great, then for him it's great and that's all that counts.
Lrsky, try and just sit back, enjoy the music and let your brother go. You will be a whole lot happier.
To further define and examine this debate, here is another dimension:
INSECURITY!!!!!!!
-- both that of the audiophile believers and their skeptics.
We like (and perhaps need) to justify the enormous effort and expense that can go into all this.
Non audiophiles dont like to feel INFERIOR while enjoying their Bose systems that they thought were high status, high performance products and we are quickly to dimiss as mass marketed garbage.
During my salad days as a bachelor in London, I used to enjoy having my suits and shoes all made by hand. Like audio, there are examples of huge hype and rip offs in this area, but there is also a secret world of expertise and suppliers known to enthusiasts.
Bespoke shoes are a particularly esoteric, laborious, and ridiculously expensive luxury. Anyone who knows the look and feel of bespoke shoes can spot a pair instantly, although they might go unnoticed by people not tuned into the differences.
Similar to well made audio, they might cost thousands of dollars, although will last 20 years if well maintained and can be "amortized" down to the price of more ordinary luxury items.
A friend of mine, who suffers from a similar arrogance to Lrskys brother, used to LOVE to try and taunt me that -- although he would spend thousands on suits, shirts and accessories -- that bespoke SHOES were a ridiculous waste of money and really not worth the difference.
He was a very competitive person, his insecurities would routinely lapse into arrogance, and he cant deal with the fact that HIS shoes might not be the most rarified and luxurious items and he COULDNT AFFORD $3-4000 for a pair of shoes.
This phenomenon seems to be exaggerated when people are smugly content in their own status because more reasonably priced products have been well marketed to their ego.
People who confidently stock their parties with Veuve Cliquot would be horrified to hear that its the SAME as much cheaper champagne served under a different label for 5 bucks a bottle.
I hope we are confident enough to say that maybe all of our hobby is not worth the extra expense, not as demonstrably fabulous as we think, and that we might certain fail double blind tests if forced to take them.
But I also hope we are investing in our own happiness -- even if placebo effect -- and for our own, private enjoyment.
Further to my comparison with clothes made in London, some tailors suggest that all pricey hand stitched monograms should be HIDDEN on the tail of shirts -- not on the chest or cuffs -- or on boxer shorts because they should all exist for the private pleasure of the wearer. Even better, white thread or white fabric?!? Only YOU know the ultimately discreet luxury of your clothes.
So here is a challenging existential question for audiophiles -- if you kept your system in a secret room and no one ever saw it but you, and you werent allowed to ever discuss it or disclose the price to anyone -- is there anything you would change about it?
Audio is particularly intimidating for some reason, perhaps because it is so expensive and not easily accessible to the laymen.
Meanwhile, most people have invested what they feel is a significant sum of money on "perfect sound forever".
I think this explains the biggest piece of the puzzle:
"Why do intelligent people deny audio differences?"
I would caution that assuming that "because the human being is subject to suggestion, and can be fooled", does not equate to "the human being is always fooled by suggestion".
Simply because something CAN happen, doesn't mean that it IS happening in any particular case.
If someone hears some differences in products, it is certainly just as much of a possibility(or more so) that it is happening, as if it is not happening.
Relegating every unproven statement to the "junk bin" just because it hasn't undergone a battery of tests, is not scientific either. All scientific hypotheses come from observations, which then leads to testing. Sometimes it works out, and sometimes not. And sometimes the testing regimen is not correctly applied, or insufficient to determine the truth.
It is incorrect to state that there are no differences in audio products because of similarity of outcome in simple measurement protocols. It is well known that the measurement protocols for audio equipment are woefully inadequate and incomplete, and this is admitted and known even(or mostly) by the people who do this testing.
Similarly, with double-blind A/B testing, there are known inconsistencies, and the outcomes are determined statistically and never called "absolute", but are always qualified by statements such as "in this test, things tended to come out this way". And all these tests are clearly subject to at least as many "psycological issues" as the ones they claim to be testing.
To me, the interesting thing continues to be why the ear of the listener, his pleasure or displeasure, in the environment he uses, is considered to be the only measurement that is not "accepted" as valuable by the "scientific community", when ultimately it is the only measure that is important to the listener. It seems that some feel that the listener's pleasure should be eliminated from the criteria for buying a product, and that he should buy strictly on test results alone.
Truthfully, I don't understand the point of trying to argue and convince a listener that he doesn't hear what he thinks(knows) he hears. What is the benefit of it? If you do convince the person, and he goes out and buys the cheaper gear that you convinced him should sound as good(based on extremely rudimentary tests and alot of speculation), and it doesn't(and likely will not), then what have you done for him? Conversely, a person should not try to convince someone to buy an expensive product if the rest of his system isn't up to supporting the performance level of that product, because it won't pay off that way. In any case, I expect that the listener will use the available methods to audition the products before they buy, and utilize any 30-day money-back guarantees of satisfaction, to safeguard their investments. By doing this, there is very little financial risk(perhaps some shipping costs), and the user can determine for himself what he prefers for his system. This is what most people do, as far as I know, so what is the big deal?
Just because a person doesn't know everything about everything does not reflect on their intelligence level. It reflects their experience level on a given subject, and possibly some insight. The dangerous part comes in when a person thinks that they know everything, to the exclusion of being reasonable enough to think that there are some things that they personally do not understand, so they attribute them to "psychological effects", and make no further attempt to understand or learn, but simply dismiss to the easiest available rationalization. This is where learning ceases, and dogma abounds.
During the past several years, I've spent a large amount of time designing and building pre and power amplifiers, in an attempt to learn more about why different designs do sound different. During that time I've become more and more aware that subjective differences can arise from small (< 1dB) deviations in frequency response and also from small changes in the harmonic distortion balance. The old rule that odd is worse than even seems to hold true, particularly at high frequencies. A smoother, more velvety treble results if even order dominates and a cooler and more clinical or even harsh treble is obtained by allowing odd order to dominate. This rule seems to hold true even when distortion is <0.001%. It is also my opinion that what people are hearing when observing changes with different interconnect cables is little more than a small frequency response change due to cable capacitance. Higher capacitance can also increase the distortion produced by op-amp buffered CD players, and this distortion is generally 3rd order.
While I do believe that audiophiles can hear changes and differences that the average person cannot, I also concede that these changes and differences are often grossly overstated. Too many audiophiles seem to be caught up with small differences in sources and amplifiers. The 2 biggest contributors of distortion in any hi-fi system are : 1.) the loudspeaker, and 2.) the listening room. (IMHO)
If he's really a scientist/educated person, he'd get his ears checked to make sure his "measuring device" is working before espousing "nuttin but ones and zeros" efficacies.
Digital technology is one thing. How it is implemented is another. It bugs me when people pull out seemingly related facts to support his own rationalization.
Being without skepticism does not render one Edison. That's a flawed argument. I don't mean to be ugly, but you posted your family squabble on a public site and asked for feedback. I'm just telling you that it seems your brother has gotten under your skin and that it seems to me like there is more to this than audio -- this seems to be a problem for you. In my experience, when someone becomes an evangelist to the extent where you want your brother to set aside his skepticism and see the world the way you see it -- it has become a larger problem than audio. You seem extremely conflicted about your brother -- that much is pretty obvious. This, to me, seems like a larger and more important problem for you to delve into rather than trying to gather like minded audio enthusiasts to side with you against your brother -- sorry -- that's just the way I see it.
Rsbeck, you are being needlessly ugly here. The first things I stated about my brother, above are, and I quote "He holds a Masters Degree in Education, self taught himself regarding computers, enough to become the MIS Director for a school system, and early in life actually self taught himself to arrange music, from existing compositions,". I would tell anyone, and have, that he is brilliant in so many ways, buy typical of many non believers. I don't point this out for the personal issues, which are real, but for the whole of audio lovers who face the same, kind of, " I won't even try it, because I don't believe it" viewpoint. I am saying that ignorance, (different from stupidity) is bliss, if one deny's him or herself the opportunity to try something due to a predisposed thought process, which allows them to not believe in the possibilities that can exist. Obviously you disagree, and I respect that, butyou are missing the finer point here, or so it seems. He's not stupid,quite the contrary; just sure that nothing that he can't understand, or explain is possible. My point is, where would we be if everyone adopted that attitude? Only the 'dreamers' and the 'what if people' like Edison, who performed (to world ridicule as the stories go) 10,000 experiments on the light bulb, before getting it. The Scientific Journal asked him, "How does it feel to have so many (at that time I think it was 5000)failures. Edison, just looked at the interviewer and said, "I don't see it that way, as a scientist, I now know 5000 things that won't work. The rest is history, and of course he perfected the bulb.I am saying that my brother's attitude, represents a group of people who, if they can't explain it, won't even try it, and for all of his brainpower, would never have invented the light bulb, or whatever, and I think that's a waste of his abilities, that's all.
So, you think your brother is ignorant -- and condescending -- because he doesn't hear what you claim to hear and he probably thinks you are deluded -- and probably questions how you can say you don't care if you have no explanation for why two power cords should sound different, you just accept it with no further investigation and then assert that HIS ignorance is bliss. Ultimately, this sounds more like fodder for family counseling, not an audio site.
By the way, how could someone who is as proud as you; enough so to take pictures of your system to show the world, make such a statement of how HE is lucky. I think you and I are lucky to have found something we love so much.
I agree to the extent, Holzhauer, only if you think that ignorance is bliss. To never go on a cruise because you are sure without knowing that you will get sea sick, or feel confined on a ship.
To not go to Paris, for fear that the ethnocentric French will give you a hard time.
To never hear music in your home played like it can be, just to save a few dollars; when we both can agree that the undertaker rarely sews money into the pockets of shrouds.
Yes he spends less, but he can afford to enjoy one of life's great joys, music, with much more lifelike gear, but allows himself to accept less through a completley shut down logic path.
I may be frivilous, but I am having fun not with only the music, but with the joy of discovery, and I hope it will always be so.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
