Do speaker cables make any difference?

[macgyver10]

Originally posted by Panicos K
I could bet that if I agree a protocol with someone and I'm the one to control any test with my team,I could send him home before the test anytime.....

Oh I see, same tired excuse...

next!

[macgyver10]

Originally posted by TerryO

Modern scientists have lost their position, funding and status within the scientific community when they're discovered to have pulled the same sort of thing.

Best Regards,
TerryO

Still don't see the relevance to what's being discussed.

[Panicos K]

macgyver10,what can I do?If I (or anyone)takes the decision it will end exactly as I say but I will still insist to what I hear.

[macgyver10]

Originally posted by Panicos K
macgyver10,what can I do?If I (or anyone)takes the decision it will end exactly as I say but I will still insist to what I hear.

The claim is simple:

"I can hear a difference between cable A and cable B"

The challenge is:

"Prove it"

The procedure is to develop a test protocol with the JREF that you BOTH AGREE ON. Once agreed upon, neither side can change the rules without further MUTUAL agreement.

Read the rules, and send in your application.

Insist all you like, this is an opportunity to convince others that you're not imagining it....plus get paid $1 million US dollars.

Unless, of course, you're just admitting that this is an irrational belief (like religion) and it will fail any well designed test.

If that's the case, then I can respect that too.

[macgyver10]

Just to clarify the point of the 1 million dollar challenge:

James Randi is not a scientist. He's never claimed to be. He's a conjuror -- a magician. He fools people into thinking they just witnessed something they didn't. That's his profession. The reason that he challenges paranormal claims is because all of them are tricks.

If you need to design a better lock for your safe, hire a safecracker. If you want to protect your valuables, hire a thief to advise you how to do that. If you want to uncover a trick packaged as a paranormal claim, hire James Randi.

If you don't believe that what we are discussing in this forum is in the same category, then TAKE HIS MONEY!

All other opinions and claims that the challenge is rigged, or the money doesn't exist, etc. are addressed on his website.

I'm not going to waste any more of your time on it in this forum.

If you think you can hear the difference, just make the application, it's that simple.

[fokker]

Originally posted by macgyver10
If you think you can hear the difference, just make the application, it's that simple.

I am sorry but would any audiophile do that? By not putting ourselves to an objective, verifiable and observable test, we lose our credibility. But more importantly, we lose our ability to feel superior to those who don't have supernatural hearings (aka normal human beings) that we otherwise don't enjoy in real life.

there is no gain but 100% lose for us to take this test. That is why audiophiles the world over are drooling but not biting that cool usd 1 million.

Instead, we would rather hide behind empty techno jargons, complicated sentences, stuff that sounds sophisticated but otherwise means exactly nothing.

We will leave fact-finding to the intelligently challenged, .

[macgyver10]

I consider myself an audiophile too. I love music. Performing it, listening to it, building components to reproduce it.

But I'm a skeptic at heart. I just can't be anything else. I've never considered the word skeptic in anything but a positive light.

If you want me, or my ilk, to believe what you claim -- there has to be better evidence than "because I say so". I'm completely willing to be convinced that there's an audible difference between speaker cables. Anecdotes don't cut it, pseudoscientific technobabble doesn't cut it. A well designed double blind test that produces a clear irrefutable result is all I need. Until then I'll simply remain unconvinced. I'm very patient.

I'll even admit that I thought I heard a difference between cables on occasion. The difference is that I don't have the conceit of trusting my hearing above reason.

When I thought I heard a difference, I set out to try and find out if I REALLY did. So far, I have to say, I'm skeptical that I actually heard a difference.

As a skeptic, I don't have a position to defend. I'm not making any claims. I'm asking that those who do make their claims, defend their positions.

[Dumbass]

Originally posted by planet10
To ad to the other comments, this is an ABX test. These have been shown -- irregardless of the number of trials -- to be statistically invalid because of the high beta.

OK, now that I know what "high beta" supposedly means, I'm calling your BS.

You don't know what "high beta" means. And "irregardless" isn't a word. "Irrespective" and "regardless" are real words.

Please explain why ABX tests, "irregardless of the number of trials," are statistically invalid.

(Hint: You can't do it.)

[TerryO]

quote:
Originally posted by TerryO

Modern scientists have lost their position, funding and status within the scientific community when they're discovered to have pulled the same sort of thing.

Best Regards,
TerryO


"Still don't see the relevance to what's being discussed."


What the relevance is, and I note that the quote was taken out of context, is that of perception, theory and proof.

To make it short and sweet, Galileo had an intuitive sense of how things worked, but rather than doing the hard work of actually proving it, simply took a short-cut and used bogus or false data to substanciate his claims. He got caught, was given another chance and tried to pull another fast one. As they say, the rest is history.

Best Regards,
TerryO

[Dumbass]

Originally posted by macgyver10
I consider myself an audiophile too. I love music. Performing it, listening to it, building components to reproduce it.

But I'm a skeptic at heart. I just can't be anything else. I've never considered the word skeptic in anything but a positive light.

If you want me, or my ilk, to believe what you claim -- there has to be better evidence than "because I say so". I'm completely willing to be convinced that there's an audible difference between speaker cables. Anecdotes don't cut it, pseudoscientific technobabble doesn't cut it. A well designed double blind test that produces a clear irrefutable result is all I need. Until then I'll simply remain unconvinced. I'm very patient.

I'll even admit that I thought I heard a difference between cables on occasion. The difference is that I don't have the conceit of trusting my hearing above reason.

When I thought I heard a difference, I set out to try and find out if I REALLY did. So far, I have to say, I'm skeptical that I actually heard a difference.

As a skeptic, I don't have a position to defend. I'm not making any claims. I'm asking that those who do make their claims, defend their positions.

"Audiophile" and "skeptic" are not mutually exclusive.

If you check the ABX website, you find that transducers (phono carts, loudspeakers) DO have audible differences. Ludicrous ********, like high-end interconnects and speaker cables, are correctly debunked.

Being an "objectivist" skeptic doesn't mean that you believe all audio components are equal. It means that you concentrate effort on the aspects that matter.

Here is the deal: people who spend all kinds of effort on interconnects and speaker cables CAN'T DO ANYTHING ELSE. They can't build amplifiers, they can't understand speaker design, so they spend all their time with snake oil.