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

[Key]

Originally Posted by Curly Woods

Well I will never say it has not happened, but after countless hours of comparisons, over many days at a time, I feel that I have trained my hearing to do what I expect it to do. If I can not repeat what I thought that I hear over and over during a course of listening, I deem it as an aberration. If I still hear it days and weeks later, I trust what I hear.

I agree with this method actually. But I would also encourage you to try out private ABX testing when it is applicable. I use this same method myself for something I am working on which is not easily measurable. So this stuff does hit home with me. It's just I do not give up trying to measure or understand what I am working on - not saying you actually do but it just comes off that way with your words. I am not going to ignore the amazing options modern computers offer us in favor of completely subjective testings just because people have gotten by in the past that way.

[Curly Woods]

Originally Posted by Panicos K

How about those who say they don't hear a difference?What does their brain tells them?
How about those who have a weak sight?They don't see well because their brain tells them?Or is it that others have better sight because their brain tells them so?The brain tells you what you see depending on what information he gets from the eyes,or is it something else?

Save your breathe Panicos. We are obviously flawed humans compared to the machines in these forums :-)

[Key]

No one is immune to suggestion and psychoacoustic effects. Just some are aware that they are not immune and some aren't.

[Curly Woods]

Originally Posted by Key

No one is immune to suggestion and psychoacoustic effects. Just some are aware that they are not immune and some aren't.

What a miserable world it must be to live in where you have to question every thought that you have as possibly being flawed.

[Panicos K]

Originally Posted by Key

Who wouldn't want a Bozo doll?

Freewheels it? No I am just saying that through suggestion - even self suggestion - you can hear things which aren't actually there and wont be picked up by a mic.

I have tried anything you can think of.Even self suggestion.In the end nothing was more helpful than a pair of glasses for my presbyopia.Now I can see clearly what's in front of me(nothing more ).I have never seen things that can't be captured by a camera ...............so far

[Key]

I have seen plenty that can't be captured by a camera. How about an evenly exposed foreground and background that extends into your full peripheral vision.

[Curly Woods]

Originally Posted by Key

I have seen plenty that can't be captured by a camera. How about an evenly exposed foreground and background that extends into your full peripheral vision.

That is a matter of the f-stop and lens length. Long lenses have a very limited depth of field vs a wider angle lens.

[Key]

I think it's a matter of a lack of processing - ie the camera has no brain.

[Panicos K]

Originally Posted by Key

No one is immune to suggestion and psychoacoustic effects. Just some are aware that they are not immune and some aren't.

So,you can't hear differences because you are aware that you are not immune to suggestion and psychoacoustic effects?
Please tell me what you think of the example of someone with a weak sight.Is it because he is aware that he is not immune to....visual illusions or anything?
I'm selling my cables.....any one interrested?

[Panicos K]

Originally Posted by Key

I have seen plenty that can't be captured by a camera. How about an evenly exposed foreground and background that extends into your full peripheral vision.

Prove it