I don't believe cables make a difference, any input?

[nunayafb]

Originally posted by Andy Graddon


More that, if such difference in "sound" of cables exist, they may only become audible in certain circumstances.

There is no proof that DBT set-ups can mimic such circumstances, hence will almost always give a "null" result. If you can prove that a DBT can mimic such circumstances, that implies that you KNOW the circumstances....

Andy,
If swapping cables only produces an audible change under certain circumstances then the cable is not making the change, the circumstances are!
A properly set up test environment will be quiet, it does not matter about the equipment used because the voltage sent through the cables does not change with the cable swap, neither do the speakers. The only "circumstance" that matters is the bias possessed by the listener/s - DBX testing is used to bypass this, eliminating all preconceived notions and any knowledge of what is being tested at any given moment.

Not directed at anyone in particular:
I don't understand why "subjectivists" cannot grasp this concept of their brains being tricked. I mean come on, we are all aware of optical illusions, why can't you comprehend the existence of an auditory illusion?
Notice I said illusion not delusion, we are all susceptible to illusion, the latter is what you are doing to yourself when you argue that it is there just because you think you heard it despite the complete and total lack of proof. The contrary is actually true, there is objective evidence that there is no change between one decent cable and any high priced cable, you deny it and use every argument you can manufacture to dispute the facts.

[Alan Hope]

Originally posted by nunayafb

Not directed at anyone in particular:
I don't understand why "subjectivists" cannot grasp this concept of their brains being tricked. I mean come on, we are all aware of optical illusions, why can't you comprehend the existence of an auditory illusion?
Notice I said illusion not delusion, we are all susceptible to illusion, the latter is what you are doing to yourself when you argue that it is there just because you think you heard it despite the complete and total lack of proof. The contrary is actually true, there is objective evidence that there is no change between one decent cable and any high priced cable, you deny it and use every argument you can manufacture to dispute the facts.

I do comprehend it - fully, Nunaya. Our brains are tricked all the time, and there is a lot of it going on in the hifi world. The point at issue is is that ALL that is going on? Are cable differences ENTIRELY illusory, or is there also an underlying audible difference that has escaped objective measurements.

I have two similarly priced ICs - one silver, one OFC bonded with carbon fibres. They sound different to me (sighted). Their electrical characteristics will be close to identical. It may be all illusory, but I want to confirm that and a blinded test is the only way to go.

[Alan Hope]

Originally posted by Jakob2
@ Alan_Hope,

if you haven´t done DBTs before, than you´ll most likely face a lot of problems to ´prove´even quite big differences in the beginning.
So before starting i´d recommend to begin with some training sessions under the dbt protocol you´ve choosen.

Try to find out whether you need short samples or longer ones, the number of breaks needed and so on.

After that training you should think about positive and negative controls; the positive control should be on a comparable sensitivity level like the ´difference´under investigation, while the negative control will prove that no external factors are the reason for a positive result.

Jakob2

I have done DBTs before, I'll have to take some care but there is no need to overcomplicate this. Investigating this issue only needs a single-blind test, not double. And I'll not face a lot of problems, and I'll not need training thanks. I trust my ears, I'm a musician, have perfect pitch, and I know my CDs and my system inside out.

Selecting 20 is deliberate - if the test doesn't reject the null hypothesis with that number then any audible differences are too small for me to bother about.

Positive and negative controls are not applicable to this particular investigation. I will be using a single short piece of music - I hear (or think I hear!) cable differences after about 15 seconds of Dire Straits for example. So I don't intend to take much longer than that.

Breaks will be just long enough for my accomplice to swap (or pretend to swap) cables. She will have a fixed time so that I get no unwitting clues whatsoever.

[Salas]

Originally posted by nunayafb
Not directed at anyone in particular:
I don't understand why "subjectivists" cannot grasp this concept of their brains being tricked. I mean come on, we are all aware of optical illusions, why can't you comprehend the existence of an auditory illusion?
Notice I said illusion not delusion, we are all susceptible to illusion, the latter is what you are doing to yourself when you argue that it is there just because you think you heard it despite the complete and total lack of proof. The contrary is actually true, there is objective evidence that there is no change between one decent cable and any high priced cable, you deny it and use every argument you can manufacture to dispute the facts.

If an illusion, I have wrote some thoughts on its psychotropic use in hi-fi culture in the previous page.

I have put a question there. --If cable differences are a sighted (normal way of listening) test illusion, will ABX proof hinder the illusion to reoccur?--

Your thoughts?

[tc-60guy]

Hello again all, I don't know what it is about cable warfare which draws me in like a moth to a flame. It's some dark, sick, primal need which can only be appeased by indulging in this twisted perversion! So here goes! Most of the cable tests I've seen have been based on either subjective listening, (Wether ABX protocol is observed or not.) or electrical mesurement directly from the cable itself. Since the ultimate interface is acoustic and not electrical, should we not measure the acoustic output from the speaker . Might certain cables affect some measureable facet of a speakers performance such as distortion, frequency response, phase, transient response, etc? I still remain highly skeptical on the subject but I'm trying to show all of you subjectivists out there what a mellow, open minded, bitch'n cool dude I can be.

[tc-60guy]

Dang! You moderators are fast!

[R-Carpenter]

Originally posted by tc-60guy
Hello again all, I don't know what it is about cable warfare which draws me in like a moth to a flame. It's some dark, sick need which can only be appeased by indulging in this twisted perversion! So here goes! Most of the cable tests I've seen have been based on either subjective listening, (Wether ABX protocol is observed or not.) or electrical mesurement directly from the cable itself. Since the ultimate interface is acoustic and not electrical, should we not measure the acoustic output from the speaker . Might certain cables affect some measureable facet of a speakers performance such as distortion, frequency response, phase, transient response, etc? I still remain highly skeptical on the subject but I'm trying to show all of you subjectivists out there what a mellow, open minded dude I can be.

Bingo!
I finished Near Field measurements of drivers, I've used in my last bookshelves design.
Hiquphone OW1 and Usher 8945P. Swapped preamp-amp ICs and the drivers measured exactly the same SPL vs F and distortion. There was a slight difference then my refrigerator kicked in. I redid the test again. Mike was about 5mm from the driver and measurements were done with analog Easy Lab on a 4x8 panel. Both drivers were exactly the same with 99.999 pure silver 22 gage, 2 in 2 out RC As and
$20 monster cables ICs that I've had for the last 10 years.
Interestingly enough, one of the 8945P ushers was doing all sorts of crap at 5khz while the other one was close to manufacturers specs. Both had a deep at 1200hz as described by few people including Zaph.

[Jakob2]

Originally posted by Alan_Hope,

And I'll not face a lot of problems, and I'll not need training thanks. I trust my ears, I'm a musician, have perfect pitch, and I know my CDs and my system inside out. Selecting 20 is deliberate - if the test doesn't reject the null hypothesis with that number then any audible differences are too small for me to bother about. Positive and negative controls are not applicable to this particular investigation. I will be using a single short piece of music - I hear (or think I hear!) cable differences after about 15 seconds of Dire Straits for example. So I don't intend to take much longer than that.

I´ve conducted sbts and dbts with slightly over 100 different listener and am just offering some advice based on these experiences.
One of the insights (very surprising in the beginning) was that even experienced listeners got difficulties under specific blind test protocols and needed some time to get used to these conditions.

So i did not intend to question your ears but to indicate that we can´t seperate our ears from our brain. And if the brain is affected by specific conditions the listener isn´t used to than the listeners hearing sensitivity will be affected too.

Of course no one ever knows and therefore a positive control would be very helpful. It should be a difference on a comparable sensitivity level like the cable difference yor were investigating, but already known to be audible. So if your were able to confirm this difference under the specific blind test conditions you´ve choosen, you know with reasonable certainty that you´ve reached a sensitiviy level suitable for the experiment under _these_ conditions.

Otoh, the negative control should assure that a confirmed difference in a test was based on an audible difference and not a side effect.

Regarding sbt or dbt... well, for your own reference a sbt will be fine, but i´d predict that you´ll face the argument that any positive result could have been based on non verbal communication with your accomplice.

Again let me assure that no offense is intended.

@ tc-60guy,

it´s not exactly the same as measuring the speaker output but bwaslos diffmaker software is a nice measurement tool for this sort of experiment.
In the end if theres is no difference at the speaker post than any audible difference is very unlikely.
Diffmaker provides the difference signal between two files and it can be done with playing just your favourite music, no need for a specific test signal.

Jakob2

[Bonsai]

The only true test here is a full DBT.

I think there is a lot of bunk about cables out there.

I spent $50 over here a few weeks ago and rolled my own and I'm happy that they are

- low resistance
- can carry 50A of current
- look reasonable
- they P.i.s.s. my wife off (thats the real value/fun of a hi-fi cable) bacuase I insist they have to be draped across the carpet, in full view

BTW, she is a trained psychologist who knows all about this DBT stuff. It seems that humans have no limit to their fallability when it comes to subjective assessments. Hence the DBT - a scientifically respected methodology.

Notice how some folk claim the DBT is not valid when it comes to equipment assessment . . . . . where to next. To paraphrase someone from another thread, ' . . . no wonder High End Audio has a bad rap . . . '.

[tc-60guy]

Greetings Jakob2, As an avowd non believer, I really don't plan to invest either the time or the money in testing cables. I'd much rather spend my time listening to music and coming up with ever wackier concepts for speakers!. I was merely playing devils advocate in suggesting a test protocol which someone so inclined might want to investigate. Cable debates are somewhat akin to arguing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. There's no conclusion and everyone walks away po'd!