If Andre decides to do this test, it seems reasonable that he should pick the interconnects that are most comfortable and familiar to him.
Andre seems to be a very good candidate for this test.
He has shown himself to be quite confident in his ability to detect these interconnect differences.
(Andre ..I apologize for talking about you in the third person)
Cheers.
ZAP
Andre seems to be a very good candidate for this test.
He has shown himself to be quite confident in his ability to detect these interconnect differences.
(Andre ..I apologize for talking about you in the third person)
Cheers.
ZAP
Oatmeal, I'm really getting tired of your whining and condescending posts, carry on and you will go to my ignore list. I do know what a DBT means, I've described how I did the blind test (I did not know which cables were used) long before I even knew about this forum.
The only test I'm interested in doing would be an 'A/B preference or identify' test with manual cable switching, if you want anything else, just do it yourself.
I only said tortoise instead of turtle because that is the term Russell used in that paragraph I posted. On further searching it seems that Asian woman and her infinite regresssion of turtles anecdote repeated by John is one of dubious provenance, also attributed Stephen Hawking. 🙄
Yes, you did. And as was pointed out then, explicitly, you didn't run anything like a proper blind test. You just liked using the term.
If the claim being made is that the differences occur on the metallurgical level, then start with ordinary copper braid speaker wire. Better cables making more difference just doesn't make sense to me. Not that I think any of this is worth effort, but if a test is going forward we/you should use the most common and most commonly used material as a control.
I don't know what is wrong with everyone elses eyes (or maybe it's just the monitor I'm using) but the illusion doesn't work on me. I can't see any hint of green - all I see is the rotating dot turning off, reverting to the background colour.
In fact that's the whole point - that the claimant can demonstrate that he can do what he claims. He should use whatever interconnects - or speaker cable (not the same thing) he chooses. -On whatever equipment he likes, in any environment and time frame he wants. -As long as the only variable is the tested item and the control, and no one knows which is which until afterward.
I'd be happy to provide an unopened set from Best Buy as the control. Heck, I'll even donate an identical length and gauge of extension cord from Home Depot as the control.
Incidentally, if anyone wanted to test interconnects, rather than speaker cable, it would be simple to do it over the net using recordings. As long as everything remained in the digital realm, and all components remained identical EXCEPT the interconnects, it can be reasonably assumed that any differences may be attributed to the variable (the interconnects).
I have posted such a test between digital / analog converter's HERE.
It's an A/B/X/ Double Blind Test which anyone can try their hand with.
I have a set of Zu interconnects with hundreds of hours on them which I could record and post a test against some new Radio Shack specials here if there's interest. Might take a while, I'll be busy most of January, but soon...
As long as you cannot see the cables or the switcher / switching process (he'd be behind a curtain or panel, or in the next room with the speakers placed in the listening room),
And the 'switcher' does not know which cable is which, only 'cable A' or 'cable B' that'd be totally fine. You would only need to tell which was which (your cable, or the control).
You would need to be correct repeatedly (10 times in a row, or 13 out of 16 tries), as anyone can flip a coin and be right half the time.
Cool pic. After staring at the centre they all disappeared. I don't know if that is the intended effect but it was dramatic.
I disregarded this simple and provable fact for years and allowed myself to believe the current wisdom of the times (dawn of subjectivism) as espoused by the HiFi industry. And I heard cable differences, cd pens etc etc.
Sound Practices really reinforced this idea, and SE and Horns soon followed.
As my system became more and more colored I was thinking wow I am hearing more and more details that were on the record.
The idea that these were actually artifacts of the system never crossed my mind.
Then a few cracks appeared, like the Carver Challenge. I was astounded, how could this be so? And I was looking for reasons as to how could this test disprove what was (to me) plain as night and day.
The only conclusion I could reach was that the test conditions somehow affected the gear or desensitised the hearing abilities of those present. This was the only conclusion that was available to me as I couldn't entertain the possibility that my highly developed (trained) hearing was wrong.
Sound familiar?
Confusion? I don't know what John's point was and I don't particularly care, the only thing I have questioned is the origin of the anecdote presented, which sounded dodgy from the start.
That one blew my mind too. At the time I was working in live sound with a large touring company. I KNEW our Crown Macrotech's could destroy most other amps RE: sound quality. I was wrong. I will say though, the extra money involved with them went entirely toward redundancy, safety, reliability, etc. They just plain worked no matter what you did to them.
Interesting.
All the tests like this that I'm aware of employ multi-way speakers.
If the aim is to determine audibility of differences, then the less electronic manipulation in the signal path the better.
The question is whether differences can be heard (assuming they exist).
IME, single fullrange drivers are usually more revealing of subtle differences than multi-ways.
Could/should a single fullrange driver be used as the speaker for these tests?
Just forgot to say Andre Visser is cool for stepping up to the plate.
If there are any shortage of participants I'll give it a try as well.
If there are any shortage of participants I'll give it a try as well.
I didn't get the impression that Andre wouldn't do it if it came to it. If anything, I wish people stopped calling others ignorant and other bad names.
That being said, we need someone who claims to have heard the difference in sound between cables. Have you Key?
That being said, we need someone who claims to have heard the difference in sound between cables. Have you Key?
He hasn't yet. At least his rear end didn't redshift as quickly as JC's, but no protocol has been set, no wires have been agreed on, and we're a long way from getting agreement (what's all that "control" biz anyway? this is a "sorting" test).
No but I am certainly open to the possibility and I have crazy hearing like that where I can pick out minute details. Maybe I just haven't heard the right cables or whatever. The problem in my case is that imo the system I use that has the least variables doesn't use RCA. But I can still try it with my vinyl rig since my monitors except 1/4", XLR, and RCA.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.