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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#3,082
terry j said:
(unless the only ones that dumped it were those cable believers that failed, and blamed the switch box for the sudden disappearance of these amazing, unmistakeable and ground breaking audio results)
Click to expand...

To be a proper test all potential confounding elements require vetting, so before a swithbox can be used it has to be shown conclusively that it does not confound the test. Switches & mechanical contacts (connections) are well know to have problems.

dave
 
#3,083
Ok fair enough.

well known by whom?

in what way?

knowing wht you know, how can we overcome it so something can occur, else it is just a smokescreen.

so it is your contention that these significant and well known problems (to be defined) are greater than the benefits of different cables.

It at least then is a measure of differences cables can bring, define the limits (yet to happen, but in relation to the deleterious effects of a contact switch) and then we have a handle on the magnitude of cables.

Start.
 
#3,084
planet10 said:


To be a proper test all potential confounding elements require vetting, so before a swithbox can be used it has to be shown conclusively that it does not confound the test. Switches & mechanical contacts (connections) are well know to have problems.

dave
Click to expand...
Bollocks. Excuses and rationalisations.

Delete my post Dave because it contradicts your position.
 
#3,085
Further to what thetubeguy1954 wrote in post #3030,"...wanting to be correct more than anything else..."

What are we trying to do with any kind of test?
If someone who claims he can hear cable diferences,feels that a cable will improve his sound and can afford it,he will buy it...again.
Someone who claims he cannot hear cable diferences,he will once again refuse to buy anything.

Both are enjoying their music.Diference is that believers need no proof,while non believers do.

To return to the comment from thetubeguy1954,do we really care for the good of science,or we just want to "be correct more than anything else"?

In the end of the day,even after a possible outcome of a cable test of any kind,history of science will not write anything for anyone,winner or looser.
 
#3,087
planet10 said:


When you are having a problem with your hifi what is the 1st thing you do? Check the connections.

dave
Click to expand...

you're right!!

the manual says (quote) make sure it is plugged in and turned on!!

Honestly, is that an answer to the 'well known' fact that switches have problems?

See, what I'm trying to do is bend over backwards to come to the party to test these claims.

I have only two 'stipulations', the identity is unknown during the test, and that they are level matched.

other than that, let's go for it.
 
#3,088
Dave et al, it's absolutely possible to do a test without a switch box. Not that anyone trying to claim audibility of wires beyond simple and well-established engineering (e.g., a wire with pathological capacitance driven by a marginally stable source will cause a different sound) has ever done so in the past 30 years...

But I do wonder if you've eliminated the other switches from your systems. How do you change sources?
 
#3,099
Here's the test protocol I suggested to another person who claimed to be able to hear differences in wires unexplainable by conventional engineering and demanded to know how to do a controlled test. His response was, "I don't think I want to change the way I do things now." If you want the results to be accepted, the person assisting in the test should preferably be a disinterested party with experience in test protocols or an actual skeptic. The key sheet and score sheet comparison should be done by a third party. Your scoring should not be communicated in any way to the person doing the swapping during the test. The Clever Hans effect is a very powerful one- a whole community of magicians (so-called "mentalists") make their living from it.

This is a copy of my email to him:

Let's say you want to compare two interconnects. Call them A and B. Have someone generate a random table of A's and B's. The best way to do this is to have the person flip a coin 12 times- for each heads, he writes "A," for each tails, he writes "B." You are nowhere in the vicinity when any of this is going on. It's very important that this sequence be random- sometimes there will be a change between trials, sometimes not.

OK, now the fun begins. Swap the interconnects back and forth, sighted, until you think you have a good handle on what you think the differences are. You need to blind things now. Either have the cable swapping done behind a screen or leave the room after each trial. To prevent accidental non-auditory cuing or other variables, even if (say) trial 3 and trial 4 are both A, the A cable should be removed and reattached.

You now have two options for the data acquisition. You can either score "A" or "B" for each trial, or you can score "same" or "different" from trial to trial. If you choose to do the latter method, the random sequence should have A refer to keeping the same cable, B referring to changing the cables, rather than A being on cable, B being the other. Again, all swapping should be done with you out of the room or behind a barrier.

You keep a score sheet, then when the test is done, compare it to the random sequence. Typically, you'll want to achieve a better-than-95% confidence (or as a real sensory guy would say, n<0.05), which will generally mean 9 out of 12 correct.

As an aid, you should be able to leave the area at any point during the test, have the cables both removed, then repeat the sighted comparisons until you're ready for the next blind trial. Likewise, you should be able to control volume, length of audition, musical choice, or anything else you think will help you in identification. It is important that the person swapping the cables not be in the area during your listening or look at your scoring, or have any communication with you- it's very easy to have subconscious cuing upset the controls. They should do the swap (or remove and replace) and leave the area before you enter or be behind the barrier and out of sight during the entire test.

Yeah, doing an actual controlled test is a pain in the *** and not as much fun as playing audiophile, but the data you get will be valid and repeatable.
Click to expand...

An alternate way to do this is to have A and B represent "change cable" or "keep cable the same" instead of "cable A" and "cable B." You still want to have the cable plugged and unplugged even if there's no change, just to prevent a nonauditory cue. It is VERY important that during the duration of the test, you and the person swapping the wires not have any direct contact.
 
#3,100
My opinion is that no consensus exist in the audio community what so ever concerning wires, also it is quite the same for amplifiers and even speakers to some extend

There are always people who say their chimp amp sound better than the McIntosh and so on. People who say some harbeth sound bad.

That just proves how much subjective our hearing is and the different level of education and perception of sound.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom