For those curious about speaker cable measurements and whether bi-wiring is all simply snake-oil, I firmly recommend this book. In particular chapter 6 'Amplifiers and Loudspeaker Cables - A General Review'. Section 6.12 deals with multi-wiring.
https://www.amazon.com/Loudspeakers...Engineering-Presents/dp/1138554820/ref=sr_1_1
https://www.amazon.com/Loudspeakers...Engineering-Presents/dp/1138554820/ref=sr_1_1
Jim Lesurf's website, mostly written as a guide to electronics for students at the University of St Andrews, has been up for many (many) years. Still one of the best:
https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/audio/biwire/Page1.html
https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/audio/biwire2/page1.html
https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/audio/biwire2/page2.html
https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/audio/biwire/Page1.html
https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/audio/biwire2/page1.html
https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/audio/biwire2/page2.html
After watching, reading, and reviewing the title - I may take issue with one little thing. Overall, the message is understood, but I wish he hadn't continued to use "Placebo effect" as the reference and in the title.
From Harvard Medical School - "Your mind can be a powerful healing tool when given the chance. The idea that your brain can convince your body a fake treatment is the real thing — the so-called placebo effect — and thus stimulate healing has been around for millennia. Now science has found that under the right circumstances, a placebo can be just as effective as traditional treatments."
Quote from this article
Emphasis added is mine.
What Gene may have incorrect is that he seems to think placebos never have 'actual' effect. By definition, "the placebo effect" is the actual change => the effect.
People may truly experience sonic differences. My thinking is that if you stipulate that people "fall" for the "Placebo Effect", then you stipulate that there is an actual effect.
Now, whether that effect could be achieved through much cheaper means is an altogether different discussion.
However, saying that there's no perceived effect when the argument starts with people falling for the "placebo effect" is a logical inconsistency.
Until Gene, or someone, studies whether the placebo effect applies to audio / audiophiles, then it's best to leave terms like that alone in this area, IMO. I've read studies about confirmation bias in audio. That's related, but different, IMO. If there are true studies around the placebo effect (or the utter absence of it) in audio, I'd likely enjoy reading them, and would appreciate any references.
Again, his meaning/intent wasn't lost, and generally I agree with him. However, words have meaning, and if he wants to be more credible, then he needs to choose them a bit more carefully, IMO.
Fun discussion, and I may have some of this incorrect. I welcome thoughts/corrections/additions.
From Harvard Medical School - "Your mind can be a powerful healing tool when given the chance. The idea that your brain can convince your body a fake treatment is the real thing — the so-called placebo effect — and thus stimulate healing has been around for millennia. Now science has found that under the right circumstances, a placebo can be just as effective as traditional treatments."
Quote from this article
Emphasis added is mine.
What Gene may have incorrect is that he seems to think placebos never have 'actual' effect. By definition, "the placebo effect" is the actual change => the effect.
People may truly experience sonic differences. My thinking is that if you stipulate that people "fall" for the "Placebo Effect", then you stipulate that there is an actual effect.
Now, whether that effect could be achieved through much cheaper means is an altogether different discussion.
However, saying that there's no perceived effect when the argument starts with people falling for the "placebo effect" is a logical inconsistency.
Until Gene, or someone, studies whether the placebo effect applies to audio / audiophiles, then it's best to leave terms like that alone in this area, IMO. I've read studies about confirmation bias in audio. That's related, but different, IMO. If there are true studies around the placebo effect (or the utter absence of it) in audio, I'd likely enjoy reading them, and would appreciate any references.
Again, his meaning/intent wasn't lost, and generally I agree with him. However, words have meaning, and if he wants to be more credible, then he needs to choose them a bit more carefully, IMO.
Fun discussion, and I may have some of this incorrect. I welcome thoughts/corrections/additions.
Adding to above for a moment...
Now... would that scenario be likely... probably not, but it's fun.
Edited to add - to remove the simple confirmation bias from the study, let's further assume that there was some sort of dopamine response associated with the 30% net positive experience with the blue cable b/c traditionally a study like this would be double blind... so... grain of salt.
- Let's imagine that there was a 'medical' grade vetted study on the placebo effect of two specific electrically identical "wires"; one blue and one red.
- Let's further imagine that under the 'right' conditions, 30% of respondents had statistically significant 'net positive' experience with blue colored cables vs. red.
- Let's assume that the 'right' condition was that their hifi guru (sub for doctor) told them that the blue was "better".
- Let's assume the manufacturer of the blue wire hires gurus to tell people that their wire is "better".
- Let's assume that the blue cable retails for 10% more than the red.
Now... would that scenario be likely... probably not, but it's fun.
Edited to add - to remove the simple confirmation bias from the study, let's further assume that there was some sort of dopamine response associated with the 30% net positive experience with the blue cable b/c traditionally a study like this would be double blind... so... grain of salt.
Last edited:
It might be if that was what was meant, but it isn't; it's just a figure of speech built into the language. He means there is no practical difference / mechanism, but by making a change they believe will be positive (or negative) people's perceptions are often skewed. A polite way of saying human beings kid themselves all the time, either out of ignorance or because they want to: 'that isn't really an ink-stain on the carpet, it's just a bit of dust,' 'that discount my wife got from the plumber was just because there was a sale on,' 'these expensive wires really do make a difference to the system, even though they're of identical gauge, materials & geometry to my old zip cord (which potentially brings us back to the plumber 😉 )'. That doesn't mean they haven't perceived something, just that their brain made it up since no functional physical mechanisms in terms of electrical or mechanical engineering have changed.
^ I wasn't asking for an explanation for why Gene used the incorrect wording / analogy, as I previously explained. I was pointing out WHY I think his words were incorrect. Placebo effect should not be a "figure of speech", IMO. It has a specific meaning, as I also previously stated.
I also stated that I completely understood Gene's point, but I disagreed with his wording and his title.
More simply put -
I think Gene was describing (and making an argument for) the former while calling it the latter.
Your thoughts (if any) on that would be appreciated. I don't need his premise further explained, but it is appreciated. My general thinking is that if you're (the you being Gene) going to feed/engage/acknowledge/battle the trolls, then it's best to be correct / accurate.
Once again, I agree with, and understand, his overall thinking.
I also stated that I completely understood Gene's point, but I disagreed with his wording and his title.
More simply put -
- IF there is no actual effect (i.e. people really are not perceiving any difference => it would be totally random in a controlled study), then it's (likely) confirmation bias not a placebo effect.
- IF there is an actual (non random) effect (people really DO perceive a difference when there is no reason other than their brain for the difference) then it's a placebo effect.
I think Gene was describing (and making an argument for) the former while calling it the latter.
Your thoughts (if any) on that would be appreciated. I don't need his premise further explained, but it is appreciated. My general thinking is that if you're (the you being Gene) going to feed/engage/acknowledge/battle the trolls, then it's best to be correct / accurate.
Once again, I agree with, and understand, his overall thinking.
Last edited:
Whether it 'should' or should not be, the fact is, it's become one. You might not like it (I can't say I'm distressed one way or the other, although strictly speaking, I don't disagree with you) but that doesn't alter its widespread use. Since this is DIYaudio, not the Ministry of Grammar and Phraseology 😉 us little guys are stuffed either way -all we can reasonably do is take it in the intended context.
Last edited:
^ We're agreed. I'm not as much of a nitpicker / pedant as I might seem. I really do try to get to the heart of people's intent vs. picking apart the language, particularly in an international crowd.
I am, clearly, and ironically, maybe not getting my intended message across. That's on me. Apologies.
Overall, I think that if we're going to talk about snake oils and the like, it should be clear whether we (our own selves) may acknowledge that there COULD be a true (by definition) placebo effect with some people.
i.e.
Do certain people believe that NO ONE could hear a difference (or perhaps better phrased perceive a difference) when cables are changed ... it's all confirmation bias.
OR
Do certain people believe that the placebo effect (like in medicine) may apply to audio also, and ... some people (like me) may hear a difference, even if... itsallinmyhead. If people believe the placebo effects exists, they might consider this alternate POV.
For clarity... I've never heard a difference between two (proper) cables of any type. This is all for the sake of discussion.
Cheers!
I am, clearly, and ironically, maybe not getting my intended message across. That's on me. Apologies.
Overall, I think that if we're going to talk about snake oils and the like, it should be clear whether we (our own selves) may acknowledge that there COULD be a true (by definition) placebo effect with some people.
i.e.
Do certain people believe that NO ONE could hear a difference (or perhaps better phrased perceive a difference) when cables are changed ... it's all confirmation bias.
OR
Do certain people believe that the placebo effect (like in medicine) may apply to audio also, and ... some people (like me) may hear a difference, even if... itsallinmyhead. If people believe the placebo effects exists, they might consider this alternate POV.
For clarity... I've never heard a difference between two (proper) cables of any type. This is all for the sake of discussion.
Cheers!
As in arguing there is, and saying it's a bad thing (in that context)? Sure, primarily because in his view (which I wouldn't argue with) it's been used by peddlers of snake-oil & the philosopher's stone as a mechanism to help sell product. Granted, that can get simplistic since some geometries etc. do produce different results in some conditions, albeit for fairly straightforward reasons of electrical engineering, but that's sometimes used as well to help sell the wares, depending on how its presented. I suppose it depends exactly how you want to apply the term 'placebo effect' since the placebo itself might vary. There may be no mechanism at all involved, beyond marketing and belief, or there may actually be a difference which is touted to the stars but actually has a very prosaic actual mechanism which is either carefully avoided or misrepresented. If it's perceived as (or actually is) beneficial in a particular context, no harm as far as that goes. But since it usually involves the excessive / unnecessary spending of money through misleading buyers, I'd generally say Gene's correct, if perhaps not perfectly phrased.
^ We're (I'm pretty sure) aligned 100%.
My only thought exercise around it was / is...
IF we acknowledge an ACTUAL placebo effect, since Gene was the one that brought up the term (even if incorrectly used)
THEN some people may experience a positive effect, perhaps not all, but some.
THEREFORE is that a bad thing? (given a return policy etc.).
Stretched further. I am a would-be customer for boutique cables. I buy some. I perceive that they're wonderful.
Someone calls me a dodo for ever possibly thinking that I could perceive a difference; because they, the electrical engineer, say that there is no difference.
To me, that electrical engineer dismisses the possibility of the placebo effect, while calling themselves (in this hypothetical situation) a 'person of science'.
It's all just a thought exercise, bottomless pit of conversation until someone actually does a study, which would likely cost millions, which likely no one would ever fund b/c it may ruin their business model.
So... in closing, I appreciate the engagement and at least making an attempt to understand MY poorly worded intent.
Edited to add - I use the words "until someone actually does a study"... Perhaps there are relevant studies I haven't read. Poor choice of words on my part (again).
My only thought exercise around it was / is...
IF we acknowledge an ACTUAL placebo effect, since Gene was the one that brought up the term (even if incorrectly used)
THEN some people may experience a positive effect, perhaps not all, but some.
THEREFORE is that a bad thing? (given a return policy etc.).
Stretched further. I am a would-be customer for boutique cables. I buy some. I perceive that they're wonderful.
Someone calls me a dodo for ever possibly thinking that I could perceive a difference; because they, the electrical engineer, say that there is no difference.
To me, that electrical engineer dismisses the possibility of the placebo effect, while calling themselves (in this hypothetical situation) a 'person of science'.
It's all just a thought exercise, bottomless pit of conversation until someone actually does a study, which would likely cost millions, which likely no one would ever fund b/c it may ruin their business model.
So... in closing, I appreciate the engagement and at least making an attempt to understand MY poorly worded intent.
Edited to add - I use the words "until someone actually does a study"... Perhaps there are relevant studies I haven't read. Poor choice of words on my part (again).
Last edited:
Placebo Effect tends to be an expression employed by skeptics not believers. Like controlled double blind testing. As in I bet it can’t pass a controlled double blind test. And if it does pass it must have been the Placebo effect. Or confirmation bias.
^ For clarity, I am 100% a "skeptic", but I do acknowledge that there is such a thing as the placebo effect. It has been proven to my satisfaction in cases MUCH more meaningful to society (IMO) than, "Does something sound better?".
If there’s a controlled double blind test for Pepsi vs Coca-cola guess what? There’s no definitive answer, it all comes down to personal preference. Duh!
16 minutes ago
What do you mean, Jelly Bean? I made my thoughts crystal clear. You don’t even have an argument. I win.
That's just waffle.
What do you mean, Jelly Bean? I made my thoughts crystal clear. You don’t even have an argument. I win.
I want to add my testimony to this. It doesn't have to do with bi-wiring, I think it did not even exist at that time.
About 35 years ago, my ears were still very good then, I moved to a new place. I had very decent equipment, a Philips CD 104, Technics 70W amplifier and (most important for sound quality) Roger's Monitor MkII. A quick and dirty setup, I stacked all my equipment on some cardboard boxes.
Then when I had the time, I hung nice shelves on the wall, so I could neatly arrange the equipment. I did not change anything else, not even the power cables. 😉
Then I started to listen to the newly arranged and stacked equipment. I swear it sounded much better. If a curtain was removed between the speakers and me. The bass was much more defined, and especially the treble was much more pronounced and I could hear details I had not heard before.
I mean, I am not making this up, I really heard this.
So yes, stacking equipment nicely on nice and level installed shelves improved the sound quality considerably. As compared to the equipment stacked one onto another and not completely level. On hollow cardboard boxes. The level issue was particularly important for the CD player.
So anyone in his right mind considers this nonsense. Which it is of course. And still the difference in sound quality was discernible. For me. Which is the best proof of placebo effect in my opinion.
About 35 years ago, my ears were still very good then, I moved to a new place. I had very decent equipment, a Philips CD 104, Technics 70W amplifier and (most important for sound quality) Roger's Monitor MkII. A quick and dirty setup, I stacked all my equipment on some cardboard boxes.
Then when I had the time, I hung nice shelves on the wall, so I could neatly arrange the equipment. I did not change anything else, not even the power cables. 😉
Then I started to listen to the newly arranged and stacked equipment. I swear it sounded much better. If a curtain was removed between the speakers and me. The bass was much more defined, and especially the treble was much more pronounced and I could hear details I had not heard before.
I mean, I am not making this up, I really heard this.
So yes, stacking equipment nicely on nice and level installed shelves improved the sound quality considerably. As compared to the equipment stacked one onto another and not completely level. On hollow cardboard boxes. The level issue was particularly important for the CD player.
So anyone in his right mind considers this nonsense. Which it is of course. And still the difference in sound quality was discernible. For me. Which is the best proof of placebo effect in my opinion.
At around 6:37 in the video Gene says "Electrically, bi-wiring does virtually nothing".
This photo was used to show the standard bi-wiring arrangement.
His statement is incorrect.
In the electrical crossover region, using the standard bi-wiring arrangement, there are now two connecting cables, effectively 1/2 the resistance of one cable. Cutting series resistance in half increases the damping factor (the amplifier's ability to control speaker motion) by almost double, which is easily measurable, and does have a sonic effect.
Something like Ripblade noticed could be attributed to the increased damping factor in the crossover region:
That said, the damping factor would be improved across the entire frequency range rather than just in the crossover region if both cables were wired in parallel:
In other words, you should get a wider ranging improvement simply doubling the cables rather than using the standard bi-wiring arrangement.
Coming from a PA background, I've definitely noticed the effect of low damping factor, and the importance of using heavy cable gauges to prevent low damping factor with long cable runs.
https://www.bennettprescott.com/downloads/dampingfactor.pdf
Art
But then you could also just just thicker cable to get that lower impendance and higher damping. It also would be easier to than such a complex wiring as on the picturre above.
And yes, the placebo effect is very real (and proven nummerous times in tests). But the sound is not better, it's your psychological perception of the sound that is better.
And yes, the placebo effect is very real (and proven nummerous times in tests). But the sound is not better, it's your psychological perception of the sound that is better.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.