But between one end(input) and the other(output)of the switch,there are wires from the switch to two pairs of sockets onto which the interconnects under test are connected,right?Actually two switches doing the same thing by moving just one lever.Plus two more pairs of sockets to complete the wirings of the switches for the two extra interconnects(from cd to box,and from box to amp)
Are the cable ground connections lifted as well, what i mean is are the cables totally disconnected from each other so both signal & screen are disconnected at both ends on each test box when testing one cable against another?
I'm getting there, perhaps i should read more instead of asking what might be obvious (though i'm not sure - so it's worth asking).
Bests, Mark
Nothing wrong to ask,but if the reply you get from more experienced people to your question is that "cable switchers switch both ends",then,nothing wrong with reading either
What about them? Don't be shy, tell us exactly.
Tell us what is says. Tell us how your "tests" compare. Results?
Because you want this to be true, or because you have evidence? Let's see your evidence of how "true performance" correlates with "audible". We're waiting.
Let's see you evidence.
Hold your hands still for a moment and tell us about your method of attaining "unforced" results (positive?).
Jakob, you allege to having performed many (hundreds?) DBT's ("properly").
Tell us your exact methods, specifically, how was switching done?
Let's see your cards.
cheers,
AJ
Last edited:
Tell us,tell us,tell us,tell us.........................
Why don't you tell us,for a change, why three different wires in line through switches,extra wires and connectors and don't know what else,will not sound different to just one wire.Tell us also why,if there will be no difference,why are you all so passionated to match their small differences to near zero levels?Some here said they use CAT5 because they couldn't hear a difference between it and a $$$$$$$ cable.
Last edited:
AJ,
Do you ever get bored of hounding people?
Why not let them do their test, have their fun, offer the results, ask how it was done and offer your opinion. Look, I'm like you in that I don't think cables mean a spit to your system as a whole but I'm not a bloody buzzsaw about it. I have to be like that at work, I sure don't want to be at home. Why don't you take a break from this? You've more than made your point.
It doesn't matter if you're right again and again does it? A guy with your wherewithal must have something better to do. So what if they believe the cables make a difference, why does that matter anymore? There is no testing protocol that will satisfy all is there?
Do you ever get bored of hounding people?
Why not let them do their test, have their fun, offer the results, ask how it was done and offer your opinion. Look, I'm like you in that I don't think cables mean a spit to your system as a whole but I'm not a bloody buzzsaw about it. I have to be like that at work, I sure don't want to be at home. Why don't you take a break from this? You've more than made your point.
It doesn't matter if you're right again and again does it? A guy with your wherewithal must have something better to do. So what if they believe the cables make a difference, why does that matter anymore? There is no testing protocol that will satisfy all is there?
Monkey see, monkey do?
The insistence here on an adversarial administrator and cheesy box o' wire und switches as the only solution says worlds about intent.
Geez, let's see. Is there any remote-enabled integrated amp - Parasound, Pass, Conrad Johnson, whatever - with sufficient resolution to expose cable differences from the source? Two DACs fed from the same source, two different cables, an applicable switching protocol, preferably computerized, disable the 'input selected' indicators. The mind reels.
Which specific administrator and which specific box are you talking about?
And how about the question I asked before, about your assertion of RF and ground loop issues in ABX testing? I've never used one of the commercial boxes, so if you actually have some data there. I'm interested. If not, well, man up and say, "Just makin' it up as I go along."
Now this thread has taken off again, thanks jakob for your answer to me earlier.
I was gonna respond, but quietly hoped the thread was dying.
From the three points you mentioned (too lazy to find and quote it) I can only conclude there is no way for us to determine cable audibilty.
Is not audio a fantastic field? Not only are we continually finding new laws in physics, but we have also found for the first time a phenomenon that is unable or does not lend itself to objective testing.
Is your point that medication/drug intake can affect our perceptions?
Maybe you'd better go back and re-read what the drug intake is that TG operates under.
You did not comment on that.
I too noted the question AJ asked about two cables in series.
look at the storm that turned up. Why is it that the 'believers' have not noticed it is actually TGs system under discussion here?
HE is the one with the two wires in series (but that does not matter, as one of them is NASA wire heh heh).
Andre knows that inevitably if you have two wires in series, the lesser wire predominates. But that argument does not apply when *we* point out the thirty feet of thin normal wire in the driver itself, or the miles and miles of power wiring before the uber power cord.
Depends on where in the argument we are I guess.
TG, I debated long and hard whether to make this point. I feared you could be offended, or worse, betrayed by honestly answering my genuine question.
But I feel fine on making the point after reading quite a few of your posts on prophead...you seem to have no aversion to 'strong talking'...so I think you can handle it.
You continually make the point that your reference is 'live unamplified music' (hope I'm correct) and use that to determine whether or not your system approaches or recedes from that with any change.
(just to re-iterate, MY view on this topic is not whether or not there is indeed an actual change to the sound, but the wisdom of going for such minor effects when there are so many more important things to tackle)
From that point, I see that you use a ten thousand dollar interconnect, which obviously I feel could have produced greater sonic returns if invested elsewhere. Does anyone else think 'room treatment'? Of course not, most audiophiles get sonic improvements from buying components, they usually cannot conceive the rooms influence.
Anyway, then you post a pic and description of your speakers. And I see that it is a single driver system......
I no longer have a great desire to listen to audiophile systems, as invariably I end up feeling mighty cheated.
" THAT has been your reference all this time!!???!!" Here the guy is, arguing long and hard on forums about this that and the other, you hear their system and realise they have not got a clue about what they're saying.
I'm afraid a single driver falls fairly and squarely into that category.
ESPECIALLY as you continually make noises about 'chasing realism'!
I don't care what instrument you choose as an example (live unamplified remember)...from a violin to a cello (let alone a double bass)...there is no way in hell that a single driver comes even close to realism.
I have no doubt that you derive a great deal of pleasure from it, that's fantastic. But please you are under some sort of delusion if you think it is real.
When any measurements happen at the test, just for kicks let's see the native response of the speakers, and an in room response too.
Should be enlightening, bearing in mind the aim is for realism.
Cause there ain't any realism to be had from a single driver (lot's of pleasure and enjoyment for sure)
I was gonna respond, but quietly hoped the thread was dying.
From the three points you mentioned (too lazy to find and quote it) I can only conclude there is no way for us to determine cable audibilty.
Is not audio a fantastic field? Not only are we continually finding new laws in physics, but we have also found for the first time a phenomenon that is unable or does not lend itself to objective testing.
Is your point that medication/drug intake can affect our perceptions?
Maybe you'd better go back and re-read what the drug intake is that TG operates under.
You did not comment on that.
I too noted the question AJ asked about two cables in series.
look at the storm that turned up. Why is it that the 'believers' have not noticed it is actually TGs system under discussion here?
HE is the one with the two wires in series (but that does not matter, as one of them is NASA wire heh heh).
Andre knows that inevitably if you have two wires in series, the lesser wire predominates. But that argument does not apply when *we* point out the thirty feet of thin normal wire in the driver itself, or the miles and miles of power wiring before the uber power cord.
Depends on where in the argument we are I guess.
TG, I debated long and hard whether to make this point. I feared you could be offended, or worse, betrayed by honestly answering my genuine question.
But I feel fine on making the point after reading quite a few of your posts on prophead...you seem to have no aversion to 'strong talking'...so I think you can handle it.
You continually make the point that your reference is 'live unamplified music' (hope I'm correct) and use that to determine whether or not your system approaches or recedes from that with any change.
(just to re-iterate, MY view on this topic is not whether or not there is indeed an actual change to the sound, but the wisdom of going for such minor effects when there are so many more important things to tackle)
From that point, I see that you use a ten thousand dollar interconnect, which obviously I feel could have produced greater sonic returns if invested elsewhere. Does anyone else think 'room treatment'? Of course not, most audiophiles get sonic improvements from buying components, they usually cannot conceive the rooms influence.
Anyway, then you post a pic and description of your speakers. And I see that it is a single driver system......
I no longer have a great desire to listen to audiophile systems, as invariably I end up feeling mighty cheated.
" THAT has been your reference all this time!!???!!" Here the guy is, arguing long and hard on forums about this that and the other, you hear their system and realise they have not got a clue about what they're saying.
I'm afraid a single driver falls fairly and squarely into that category.
ESPECIALLY as you continually make noises about 'chasing realism'!
I don't care what instrument you choose as an example (live unamplified remember)...from a violin to a cello (let alone a double bass)...there is no way in hell that a single driver comes even close to realism.
I have no doubt that you derive a great deal of pleasure from it, that's fantastic. But please you are under some sort of delusion if you think it is real.
When any measurements happen at the test, just for kicks let's see the native response of the speakers, and an in room response too.
Should be enlightening, bearing in mind the aim is for realism.
Cause there ain't any realism to be had from a single driver (lot's of pleasure and enjoyment for sure)
Alas, no such luck. Even SY, one of the smartest men I know can't leave it alone.
Sorry Terry,I don't think I've said that.My post #11560 was a reply to auplater's #11547.I don't see anywhere anything there to agree with your comment.
Yes,I knew about TG's health problems.I hope you know I'm really sad about this as all here are.I only wish we could help.
One more thing,since you are one who has stated you are interrested in human's behaviour.There might be others among us who suffer from health problems,but for some reasons of their own,may not feel well to share it with others.We could add this to the many others where people are different.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.