I didn´t think exactly that way, but read in the beginning of 80´s for the first time about blind tests in audio, tried to find all references back to the introduction of the ABX box and read with steadily growing astonishment about the results.
We made our very first blind test back then (capacitors- MKP vs. MKT) and i got a positive result, but did note that it is easy to be fooled by pretended switches under test conditions.
Later i read Nousaines Article about the "sameness detection problem" and found our observations confirmed. If you´re not trained under blind test condition you´ll most likely fail to detect "sameness" .
Wishes
AJinFLA,
A) First let me commend & thank you for the much more respectful & civil manner you're addressing me with in this post! It's greatly appreciated & it's what I've been hoping for, for quite some time. I do still notice some berating in your assumptions of what you believe I have and haven't done in the 20 years since those tests I spoke of in my post but, hopefully you'll also cease doing this. If so I know we'll be able to have some good debates/discussions about audio. That said, let me now address the points you've raised.
B) While it's absolutely true the DBTs I've refered to previously in this thread in a detailed manner I might add, were done almost 20 years ago in Connecticut after I was shocked at hearing a difference between Monster Cable and Audioquest wires. I don't quite understand how or why knowing that would cause you to immediately jump to the mistaken conclusion of assuming that also means or implys I haven't since verified that I can also detect differences in wires on my present audio system, in the audio room of my home. AJ, in the 4.5 years I've lived in my home ---{previously I mistakenly claimed it was 5 years}--- I've done more than a few tests to determine I can in fact hear differences in wires with my current system in the room it's in. Many tests were done alone. Others tests were done with either members of the Space Coast Audio Society, the Central Florida Audio Society or the SETriodes forum on Yahoo present. Sometimes tests were done with members from a couple or all these groups present. I'm so confident of my ability to detect differences on my system that I previously offered to submit to being tested quite a bit earlier in this thread.
I recently had members of all 3 groups over to test whether or not we could hear differences between the Stealth Audio Sakra & other ICs. The others brought 47 Labs, Harmonic Truthlink, Audience Gold, a custom design, & Mike Rispoli's Gen VII ICs to test against the Sakra. Although I know you'd like more proof of these tests I'm not comfortable listing people's entire name or email addresses on a public audio forum. I'll do this and "if" any of them read this and wish to verify they were there they can. I can tell you Roger Russell, the ex-McIntosh speaker designer was supposed to attend but had a health issue arise. I suppose you could email him through his website and ask him if Paul B was supposed to pick him up and bring him to Tom Scata's (<< me) house! Those who were present consisted of CFAS= Paul B, Mike R, SCAS= Mark M. Chris V. Mike P. SETriodes= Maynard G & Myself (I'm also a member of Central Florida Audio Society and some listed are also members of another of these groups. I've tried listing them with the group to which they're primarily associated.)
The final consensus was that although differences could be heard to varying degrees between the 47 Labs, Audio Note Silvers, Harmonic Truthlink, Audience Gold, a custom design, & Mike Rispoli's Gen VII, they all shared a certain commonality of sound even though all were very different designs. One person suggested this commonality of sound had much to do with the sonic signature of metal crystals of all stripes, whether gold, silver, platinum, or copper! As far as the Stealth Sakras I felt and others agreed they're they're first cables that genuinely sound much more like live music does, as opposed to a component upgrade or merely changing perspective or flavor, which occurs when exchanging almost all other ICs. The Sakra is in a class of it's own compared to every other IC I've ever heard.
C) SY, Key and other members are welcome to visit my home and setup a wires test whenever they'd like to. I'm quite confident I can detect differences in most interconnects, I'm fairly good with speaker wires as well. Where I have trouble detecting sonic differences in wires is with power cords. AJ "if" you continue being respectful & civil and stop the assumptions and berating comments you might be invited as well. In case this thread ends my email address is: thetubeguy1954(at)yahoo(dot)com My phone # is: (407) 207-4364
D) No I do not own the Holly Cole CD "Don't Smoke in Bed" I found her website and damn the Canadian is dolly. With those gorgeous green eyes and that sexy voice, I'll be buying more than her "Don't Smoke in Bed" CD! For those who'd like to check out Holly's website here is a link: HOLLY COLE - The Official Website
AJ, thanks agin for what I'm hoping is a genuine attempt on your part towards civil communications between us!
Thetubeguy1954
~Rational Subjectivism. It's An Acquired Taste!~
Well to me it's a necessary evil much like a crossover. It's not "should I decode" but more "How should I decode". So in that respect you really aren't going to get anything that benchmarks better than 64-bit float 192kHz. The distortions in some cases are so small I can't even measure them with operations in digital. Specifically the thing I was doing with emulating room reflections depends on how you do it and the parameters - the time envelope and amplitude. But these only effect measurements and I actually find that signals with a short reflection and comb filtering sound subjectively clearer and more 3-D. Also you can do this trick after converting to 4 channels so that any interference with the original signal is minimized - if you do it prior to decoding then it can make the stereo signal measure funny depending on the specifics. You bored yet? 😉
tg1954, if I can work out how to do it, I'm there. The issue, BTW, isn't just the matter of "witnesses," but also getting the details of the protocol taken care of. There's a lot of subtlety to doing a good, solid controlled test. On the bright side, if you score significantly, it's a nice JAES paper and will be the first really solid evidence of cable audibility (beyond the accepted audibility of pathological wire and equipment).
On the downside, if you don't, it's just one more set of trials that can't get published and will be blithely dismissed by the folks who think, "Oh, yeah, HE couldn't do it, but *I* can."
On the downside, if you don't, it's just one more set of trials that can't get published and will be blithely dismissed by the folks who think, "Oh, yeah, HE couldn't do it, but *I* can."
I posted about them somewhere else on the forum. Tried them with my speakers (top section of a triamped system, balanced drive) and some single driver speakers that Morgan Jones brought to ETF, driven by the Scrapbox Challenge SET amp. If there was a difference, none of us could hear it. Bud was a real mensch for donating them to the cause.😀
SY thanks and I learnt a new word 'mensch'. I am getting excited that we have tg1954 and you about to make history. If tg1954 can hear cables DB he may also be able to hear electron pools like Bud does. I eagerly await future developments. Merry Christmas.
I also like simplicity, much easier on the brain. 😀
Do you listen to music or play for the neighbourhood? 😀
AJ, I believe everybody build a system to suit their own taste, I can only tell what I use and perhaps my way of thinking, the rest is up to you. I don't have any personal experience with any of your equipment, the only concern I may have (if I understand correctly) may be the BMSpro 12" coax, is that a 12" driver playing midrange, if so up to what freq? I believe 10AWG cable is good on LF but for mid and high frequencies, if possible, try 12 to 14AWG and listen if you can't hear more definition.
If you get rid of the cable and directly connect the amp to the mid/highs it should have even more definition? And this is equivalent to a thicker cable. Your "more definition" sounds like an artifact of the cable's resistance.
Yes.
No, I don't think so. 🙂
I get the same effect when using monoblocks with 1m cables and with 2.5m cables (same cables), I believe that will offset the impedance difference between the different dia cables.
If the chart another member showed some time ago,about thickness/skin effect relation is correct,using a thicker cable for mid/highs than the one used for lows,will(I tried it long ago)cause a serious degradation of the MF/HF.Smaller thickness(than that of the lows) on the MF/HF input will reduce HF drop and distortion(due to lower skin effect),resulting in better definition.The thickness ratio for MF/HF and LF is determined by the crossover point,and the taste of th listener🙂.On a bi-wireable 2-way speaker with high x-over frequency you may use a lot thinner cable than on the woofer,while on a large 3-way bi-wireable speaker,bass and mid/high cables should perhaps be of closer thickness.I don't know what possible measurements of the speaker response will show,but I think they will be "smaller" than expected comparing them to the audible difference which is very obvious.
Last edited:
Hello SY!
Yes I well understand perfectly well the need for protocols on any test. I only listed the witnesses because AJinFLA has asked me about them in the past and I believe at least one of them visits diyaudio.com who might verify the test actually occured.
Before I'd take a test for the record I'd have to know just exactly how the test would be conducted BEFORE I'd submit to it. However as you SY and I are staunch proponents of manuel switching ---{of course with all the necessary precautions in place to make sure a case of "Clever Hans" doesn't accidentally occur}--- I'm fairly confident that we could arrive at a test that would satisfy both our requirements.
Should such a test take place and I'm unable to detect differences in that test, I will be willing to admit so publically. I would only ask the same thing of my tester. Thus should I pass the test, they'd be required to admit publically that I did indeed pass the test. Who knows my name just might be in the JAES!!! If that occured I wonder if Randi would still have enough courage of conviction about his beliefs to open up his 1,000,000 challenge to me?
Thetubeguy1954
~Rational Subjectivism. It's An Acquired Taste!~
Last edited:
rdf, that's the first thing to be done, yes.
tg1954, you've read my protocols, does that sound like something you could do?
tg1954, you've read my protocols, does that sound like something you could do?
OK, add in variations of wire diameter size in a dbt test - my guess is that there will be no audible differences provided:
(a) the smaller diameter wire is still a reasonable thickness (awg 16?)
(b) the cable runs are not crazy (say less than 12 meters each side) and
(c) the amps are solid state.
Under those conditions the variations in frequency response etc are below audibility.
See the frequency chart I posted earlier for 25' of 18 gauge into a very inductive speaker load. A couple dB drop @ 20 kHz would be no surprise with 12 metres of 16 into something resistive.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.