Why Power Cables Affect Sound

Power cables and cables in general, do effect the sound because they are and act as filtering devices - it is simple as that. 

djones51,
I agree; nothing wrong with the placebo effect!  (And that btw is not presuming everyone here is just experiencing something like the placebo effect!).
I have no problem with the idea I may be indulging in perceptual biases myself.  I certainly find the looks of a speaker enhance my enjoyment of the sound.  I've had tweaks in my system that seemed to make a difference.  I kept them in because, hey, if they are helping me perceive better sound, I'm good with that.   But I would be cautious about claiming from my experience objective truths.  And when I am more motivated to know what's really likely, then I may just read more about the phenomenon and/or indulge in some blind testing.

Meeeeeoooowww!  🐈💩😷

Hey, Costco, snap out of it! I didn’t say electrons are force carriers. I said they are charge carriers. Everybody knows that. 

So prof, it seems that you did not hear differences in the pcs you tried. If you did, or thought you did, you doubted yourself as a listener, and claim placedo effect. That is a problem right there, so thanks for clearing that up. Are all of your buddies who loaned you cables, experiencing the placedo effect? Are you saying that everyone is experiencing the placedo effect, in this particular instance. You can " shrink " this all you want, as I know the listener you are, which is ok with me, and, I know the listener I am. And if this concerns you, bothers you, intimidates you, well...…………….I mean no harm.  Cheers, and Enjoy ! MrD.

George and kosst, you guys really crack me up. It is worth coming here just to read the 2 of you. Enjoy ! MrD.

Mrdecibel, let's not forget about negative placebo effect - if you strongly believe that cable doesn't make any difference then it won't make a difference for you.

kijanki….+1.....Enjoy ! MrD.

Costco, you’re confused. Transistors are not analogous to signal propagation in wire. Why are you trying to cram words down my throat? You should have stayed in school like your mommy kept telling up.

Actually, I believe folks here are confusing photons with protons.  If you get photons in your cables, your least problem is sound quality.   Rather you have an arc happening inside the cable, which won't stay inside the cable for long.Signal and energy travels in the E and H fields on the wire, which are at right angles to one another. I think some folks were trying to state this in words of some sort.For more information on some of the aspects of why power lines can affect sound, see my other post: A problem with AC Power you may not have considered. 

mrdecibel,

So prof, it seems that you did not hear differences in the pcs you tried. If you did, or thought you did, you doubted yourself as a listener, and claim placedo effect. That is a problem right there,

I detailed the situation earlier in the thread. Did you read it?  In a nutshell, I did not perceive any obvious difference with a couple Shunyata power cables.  But in the most expensive (and biggest, thickest) one I was given, I thought I heard an obvious difference.  The system seemed to become more lush, darker, smoother.   It seemed so obvious I wondered if I actually liked my system with that cable in use. 


Then I had a friend help me blind test it against a cheap stock power cord.  In which case, all the sonic characteristics I felt so sure I'd heard disappeared and I couldn't for the life of me distinguish the sound from the cheap power cord.

In other words:  when I actually decided to just trust my ears, not my eyes, the high end cable didn't pass that test.

This is not surprising, if you know anything about the nature of how fallible our subjective inferences are. 


I have no problem admitting I'm human and fallible.   I feel that is actually being open minded, vs vs insisting that my subjective assessment just "absolutely, can not ever be wrong!"

You didn't answer my question:   Are you open minded to being wrong about what you believe you have heard in your system? 

 Are all of your buddies who loaned you cables, experiencing the placedo effect? Are you saying that everyone is experiencing the placedo effect, in this particular instance.

As I already stated: I am not claiming everyone here is just experiencing a bias or placebo effect.

But the method used by most audiophiles to test gear - with particular relevance to controversial tweaks - is not, unfortunately, well suited to distinguishing between bias effects and the real thing.

All cables have a resistance, an inductance and a capacitance. Can these three physical quantities account for ALL of the differences in sound that power cables provide? I'm sure fancy multi stranded power cables have different R, L and C values compared to romex or generic power cables. 

I'll say it again. The differences are due to the level of noise rejection afforded by the power cable. Volts is volts, current is current, cycles is cycles. But noise is not noise. Time to give this a rest.

prof, you never stated in your earlier posts that you did not hear any differences with the Shunyata cables, although, I assumed it by your writings. Is it possible for me to be wrong ?. Anything is possible, but I have not been wrong that I can remember ( and, I am talking about, and only about, this particular subject concerning my listening abilities ). There have been times I have not heard a difference, or a difference that was very subtle. Generally, quite dramatic. What about your friends and buddies ? You did not answer that question. And, I am not sure what " test " you are speaking of. I take a cord out of my system, replace with another one, and wait. I listen to the same several songs I am familiar with ( and these are mostly from audiophile labels ), as I feel they are less processed at the studio end, and show greater sq than most. But, I can also play something like the Rolling Stones’ Wild Horses, and hear differences, when differences exist. Here is another one for you. Not only do I hear differences in power cords, but I can hear them " break in " ( also known as burn in ) with use and time. There are other threads about breaking in of equipment here, and elsewhere. On another thread, I stated that I was, once again, cleaning out my closets, of the plethora of amplifiers I have on hand. In this process, I am listening to them again, and even modifying a few, before I sell them. You know what. They are all different is sq. So listen, I feel I am wasting my time here, with you, and some others, so I am happy to move on and let things be. So, continue pronouncing on the subject, as you will no longer have me reply to you. We are obviously worlds apart in certain areas of this hobby, no matter what you may say or think. Although, we both enjoy music, and enjoy listening to music. Be well, be merry, and Happy Holidays. Enjoy ! MrD.

Kat a mite=🐍💩

kosst_amojan1,860 posts12-17-2018 9:21pm@geoffkait

Good. So you agree that the electrons are moving and photons are the byproduct like I said.

>>>>Electromagnetic signals (photons) could not propagate through space where there are no electrons if your statement was true.

mrdecibel

Again, congratulations on never having suffered perceptual bias when listening to a sound system. Something of a miracle!

Are you sure you haven’t fallen in to just another form of dogmatism, in this case, an almost perfect confidence in your own perception?

Anyway...enjoy your cables. When they finish breaking in....;-)

If I want an explanation about how things really work is a forum with an almost subjective field of interest  the right place to ask such questions?
For entertainment purposes for sure and also for psychological purposes if that’s your field of intrest. I have of course entered the study group myself when adding something to this tread. 

Who has a science degree is this field? Who has done scientific recearch on this particular subject? Who became an Google copy and paste expert on the subject? Who is self though? 
Who though that the other was wrong, incomplete or almost right but made a small mistake about a electron , proton , quark or whatever particle or discribed how the travel , flow , behave at what speed and seriously tried to help , correct of convince the other? 

The topic though me nothing that had anything to do with this question.  But it was entertaining. 

If you hear or think that you hear an improvement and it makes you happy and either rational or emotional you can afford why do you need an explanation? 
If placebo’s make me feel good than placebos are good for me. 
If you hear a deference with a powercord (I have tested many to say that I hear differences) then you expiriance problably what many of us do. Others don’t. Great!  

I think that believers and non believers are both right but please can some one tell me who has the right explanation for this question? 

Mayby a top 10 list with a majority vote for the most right on top? 

@stevecham I think you may be on to something. However when I think of noise, I think of background hum or hiss. Does this noise you speak of go further than a veil over the music and the reduction of it makes the treble less harsh, improve the slam of the music and make things more dynamic and musical - the things I have experienced with better power cords. Also note, I am fortunate in that my listening environment is quite free of RF noise pollution and the like. I use a number of RCA cables that have no shielding and I’ve never picked up noise through them. 

Psychological bias cannot be used to explain all positive results. Psychological bias can be eliminated from candidates by careful and thorough testing. Psychological bias is typically used by naysayers who do not trust their own hearing and/or who wish to disparage some audio tweak or another. No one has said there’s no such thing as psychological bias or that it can’t occur in audio. But to claim it explains all controversial or mysterious audio phenomena is pretty absurd.

Electronics are a lot like a copy machine.  If your copier makes a perfect duplicate, and prints it on the finest bond paper, it comes out very much like the original....however if you use corrugated cardboard, you may not even recognize the final product.   Use the best power to operate your equipment.

@mrdecibel : "N80. I am not fond of the power cables your brother in law gave you, but here is an idea."

Actually, you don't know what type of power cords I have.....because I don't know what kind of power cords I have. I presume they are OEM. Which, according to what I've read in this thread means they are sub par. You can't trust AR or Mark Levinson to put decent cords on their stuff.

"Make the change of the power cords, Listen for a few days, and get back to " us " with your findings. This will let all of us know what kind of " listener " you are ?"

That struck me as funny. Sounds like something from a Monty Python skit. "If she floats she is a witch and we will burn her. If she sinks and drowns she's not a witch."

So if I hear a difference then you cable guys are right. If I don't hear a difference then I'm just one of those guys without discriminating perception (a very real possibility I'll admit). The scenario doesn't seem to allow for the possibility that I AM a discriminating hearer and don't hear a difference because the cables simply don't make a difference OR the scenario where I hear a difference but that difference is a product of  my perception bias, which unlike some folks I KNOW that I experience from time to time.

So, technically speaking, this simple test doesn't tell us anything about cables or my hearing discrimination. 

"Actually,don’t do it for me, as I am way past that, but, do it for you, as the experience will be enlightening." 

It could be enlightening, but not necessarily so as I outlined above.

" #1 : You will not do it, nor feel like doing it."

Admittedly that is probably the case. To me, my system sounds remarkable. I'm not really inclined to chase a vaguely defined goal of "better" especially when, for me, that "better" might just be different. Then I'll waste time dithering about which is better without really knowing.

"# 2 : You will do it, but the results might be, you either hear a difference, or you don’t."

Those are indeed the only two possibilities. 

 "# 3 : If you hear differences, you could speak about them here. Or not."

If I do the test I will certainly share my results. But as mentioned above those results might be meaningless since I know I am not immune to perception bias and/or other psychological influences. My results may not be trustworthy and cannot be purely objective. For instance, I know for a fact that the mood I'm in can affect how I perceive and enjoy music. Who would trust the opinion of someone like that?

"I am sure many of you have a " gift " in some area of your life. 2 channel audio is mine."

I honestly do not mean any offense by this at all but there is certainly the possibility that power cable upgrades and other such tuning is for people with the "gift" and not for people who don't. Geoff maintains that high end component makers are not aware of the power cable upgrade market. It seem more probable that they just aren't aware that there is a population of listeners out there who can really tell a difference.

I do not think that I have the "gift". That does not bother me at all. I have found a way to really enjoy music. With my personality if I did have the gift I don't know that I'd ever reach the point where I was just enjoying the music because there is always a new tweak or cable out there.

So back and forth it goes, and nothing changes. Why not get 10 sample audiophiles who have a history of posting here and have a listening study. Location could be at an agreed on audio show so it would give us some fun things to do.Small  ante fee to be determined. Say $200? 5 for and 5 against believing or not believing the difference power cables make. Blind test. Any person can switch sides after the test. Score the test and the winners take all. The losers get a audiophile t-shirt for parting gift. We all get to meet each other and have some laughs. I'm in, so we only need 9 more. 

prof

I had a friend help me blind test it against a cheap stock power cord. In which case, all the sonic characteristics I felt so sure I'd heard disappeared and I couldn't for the life of me distinguish the sound from the cheap power cord.

That doesn't sound like a double blind test, so the results aren't scientifically valid.

... when I actually decided to just trust my ears, not my eyes, the high end cable didn't pass that test.

Even though the test wasn't scientific, you can't accurately say that the cable "failed" the test. The purpose of a listening test is to determine whether - under the specific circumstances of the test - a difference is detected by a given listener or listeners. The test is only a "failure" if for whatever reason the listener is unable to make a choice one way or the other.

tobor007

Why not get 10 sample audiophiles who have a history of posting here and have a listening study. Location could be at an agreed on audio show ... Blind test ... The losers get a audiophile t-shirt ...

I’ve suggested this several times, and agree that an audio show would be good place to conduct a scientifically valid, double-blind listening test. The problem is that few audiophiles seem to have an interest in participating in such tests, which to be fair are typically time consuming and tedious. Most of the contributors here who clamor for blind testing do so as a red herring - they’re not really interested in such tests and if they were, they’d have conducted a few and would share the conditions of the test and results with others here.

By the way, there is no "loser" in an audio listening test, because a listening test is not designed to test the listener. For that, you see an audiologist.

@jea48 haha! It did not happen, but we tried.

@djones51 I’ve heard that a power cable needs to be at least a minimum length to have a good effect, say 5’ or more. I don’t understand why but it makes sense to me that there would be a shortest length which has an effect. I don’t think a 1/8” long power cable will do much good.

@geoffkait I agree it can’t all be psychological bias. I have too many personal experiences that tell me something else is going on (in many instances). I remember when I was exploring different speaker wire gauges, dielectrics, and geometries. Many times I hooked up the cables and expected a positive improvement and got it. Then I hooked up a cable that I was so confident would be the best yet and I hooked it up and it sucked the life out of the treble. Still convinced I had a good cable, I tried it again and again at different times of the day, in different moods, and after some burn-in and even after trying to trick myself that it was better sounding - it just wasn’t. I ripped it out and went back to my original cables. In no subtle manner, the sound was back to enjoyable with lively treble. There is a zero percent chance that what I experienced was “all in my head.”

I really did not mean their would be a loser. Just fun and perhaps some learning tied in with a good show.

geoffkait wrote:

"Psychological bias cannot be used to explain all positive results." ......
"But to claim it explains all controversial or mysterious audio phenomena is pretty absurd."

That poor, poor strawman geoff, won’t you ever stop beating it? Have some mercy on the thing!

tobor007

I really did not mean their would be a loser. Just fun and perhaps some learning tied in with a good show.

Please count me in as a potential subject for a blind listening test. However, if you think it's going to be fun, you'll almost certainly be disappointed. I've participated in a few of these tests. They're tedious. And boring. And that's even before you try to digest the results.

🐈💩😷

🐈a....  😻

@tobor007 I like your idea. Now we just need to find a vendor who will let 10 people “steal” their system for an afternoon. Haha!

One of my concerns with “on the spot” listening tests is that I need time to learn a specific system’s sound first. I can pick up on very subtle changes with my system because I am very acquainted with it. If I go to someone else’s house, I would not fare so well because I am not very acquainted with the “baseline” sound. Give me enough time, which could be hours or days and I would do much better on listening tests. What I am alluding to is that if we show up at an audio show with an unfamiliar system, we could all fail a listening test and there could still be differences between cables that we miss because we aren’t familiar with the “baseline” sound. 

mkgus

One of my concerns with “on the spot” listening tests is that I need time to learn a specific system’s sound first. I can pick up on very subtle changes with my system because I am very acquainted with it. If I go to someone else’s house, I would not fare so well ... Give me enough time, which could be hours or days and I would do much better on listening tests. What I am alluding to is that if we show up at an audio show with an unfamiliar system, we could all fail a listening test and there could still be differences between cables that we miss because we aren’t familiar with the “baseline” sound.

You will not "fail" a listening test, because such tests don’t actually test the listener. For that, see an audiologist; that’s what they do.

But your point about being part of a listening test using an unfamiliar system is quite valid, and represents one of the many issues that must be addressed as part of designing a scientifically valid test.

Why not remove the in wall receptacle and hard wire to the Romex?

prof1,573 posts12-18-2018 11:18amgeoffkait wrote:

"Psychological bias cannot be used to explain all positive results." ......
"But to claim it explains all controversial or mysterious audio phenomena is pretty absurd."

That poor, poor strawman geoff, won’t you ever stop beating it? Have some mercy on the thing!

>>>>>If the shoe fits wear it. 👠. - Old audiophile axiom 

rocknss

Why not remove the in wall receptacle and hard wire to the Romex?

That wouldn't likely meet NEC or local electrical code.

@cleeds

Even though the test wasn’t scientific, you can’t accurately say that the cable "failed" the test.

Obviously I was speaking colloquially. But the point expressed is certainly correct: The cable "failed the test" in the sense that I could not distinguish it from a cheap cable, hence for the proposal "there is an audible difference between the expensive cable and the cheap cable" I was left with the null hypothesis.

That doesn’t sound like a double blind test, so the results aren’t scientifically valid.

1. Of course double-blind tests are the gold standard. But in case you are implying that single blind tests are not "scientific," that would be incorrect. Single blind tests are often used where double blinding is not feasible.



2. Double blind testing in my case was not feasible (at least for the power cables) so all I could do was attempt single blind, to at least control for some variables. A friend helped me by being the cable switcher. I wore a blindfold. Of course one of the variables are confounding cues - e.g. from the tester to the subject - that can influence or give "tells" for a false positive result. As I usually do if I’m single-blinding, we did some pre-tests to establish whether this was a factor. So we first did some testing for that variable. I was blindfolded and the switcher did not speak to me, only switched when I said "switch." The switcher did not speak to me even to say "ok" that he was finished switching - just my noting the activity involved with the switching, and waiting an appropriate amount of time, sufficed between switching.


We did some randomized testing (tester coin-flipped before-hand to establish pattern) in which no music signal was played. With blind-fold on, I would say "switch" and the tester would simply switch between the cables (or not switch but pretend to by still unplugging and plugging the same plug in). In this way we established that my guesses for which cable was being used, or even when one was switched, were random. Suggesting that I was not able to get cues from the switcher as to which cables were being swapped, or if a cable was being swapped.


Then we proceeded to the music trials, which were done in the same way, and the results for my trying to discern between the Shunyata and cheap AC cable were random.


In this way, not only was I blinded, but we tried to control for a type of experimenter bias (where the experimenter subtly influences the outcome) to the degree possible. Given during the trials, there was no verbal communication from the switcher to me to add that influencing variable, and our pre-trials suggested we had eliminated a confounding variable of whether I was getting some other extraneous cue via the sound of the cable switches themselves, then I think we did a pretty good job of controlling for variables given our resources.


3. The conclusions and claims I draw from my own blind testing such as the above are modest. Both in terms of the modest level at which I can blind test audio gear, and in terms of inferences from bind testing in general. I do not claim from my own attempts to blind test: "therefore there IS no audible difference between the power cables in question."


Only that I was not able to discern any when I attempted to control for other variables. Of course my own experience influences my purchases (if I’m not able to demonstrate to myself I heard a difference, I’m not going to buy the cable). And given the well-established problems of subjective bias, it makes more sense to put more emphasis on the trials where I attempted to control for such variables - as well as introduce faster switching - vs the causal sighted trials with no attempt whatsoever to control variables.


Nor do I claim from my own tests, of course, "therefore NO audible differences exist between AC cables, and every positive anecdote is due to subjective bias." That would be far too rash and unwarranted.
BUT....I put my own experience in the context of the bigger picture.For one thing, whatever the status of my blind tests, one thing is clear:In the sighted trials I perceived specific difference between the two cables. In the "blinded" trials, I simply did not perceive that difference any more. That in of itself is telling about the variable nature of perception.

And this fits well with all the scientific understanding on how variables can influence perception. And that this ought to be taken in to account especially when trying to discern if there are even differences existing in the first place.

Then I put that together with the fact that the claims about audible differences between AC cables in the audiophile world are pretty much all uncontrolled anecdote. I have yet to encounter blind testing data of any kind, validating the claim that a boutique audio cable produces audible differences from a cheaper (competent) ac cable.

And then I add in all the debates I’ve observed where qualified electrical engineers weigh in on the claim made by audiophiles and high end cable companies, in which the engineers seem to me to make the more convincing case against the high end cable claims.

Finally, one doesn’t even have to be a qualified electrical engineer to notice that the very nature of the claims made by high end AC cable manufacturers are extremely fishy in nature, in the ways I’ve detailed here many times before. They make much about technical measurable phenomena being a problem, but rarely provide objective measurements showing they have "fixed" the problem and, more important, do not provide evidence from the beginning that the phenomena in question was audible (in regular competently built AC cables/equipment), and that their component produces audibly detectable results (no controlled blind testing). Instead, it goes "here’s this technical problem with AC cabling that we address" and then it just punts straight to marketing hype and audiophile anecdote as vetting the claims.


These are reasons why I think my general skepticism regarding high end AC cable claims are warranted. That is entirely different from claiming "AC cables make no audible difference" - a claim I have never made.
Unfortunately, it seems some are so dogmatically wedded to confidence in their subjective results that they see any challenge, any skepticism raised about those results, as somehow being a dogmatic rejection of their claims. "Look, YOU may be fallible in your perception, but THERE’S NO WAY I’M WRONG!" It’s projecting their own dogmatism the other side, while, amazingly, holding themselves to be the "open minded" ones.

n80

That struck me as funny. Sounds like something from a Monty Python skit. "If she floats she is a witch and we will burn her. If she sinks and drowns she's not a witch."

So if I hear a difference then you cable guys are right. If I don't hear a difference then I'm just one of those guys without discriminating perception (a very real possibility I'll admit). The scenario doesn't seem to allow for the possibility that I AM a discriminating hearer and don't hear a difference because the cables simply don't make a difference OR the scenario where I hear a difference but that difference is a product of my perception bias, which unlike some folks I KNOW that I experience from time to time.

Yes, you've put your finger on the problem here. "negative" results are never counted - the relevance is only ever dismissed.  If you ever fail hearing a difference it can only be your fault, or the fault of whatever test you conduct.  If you acknowledge your own fallibility, and the general fallibility of humans in this regard, you are dogmatic.   It's NEVER that the subjective results of the audiophile could be wrong.

And remember...they are the "open minded" ones  ;-)