terry j said:
No, not independent of the variables you mention.
Any change to my system is for my personal pleasure. So if I like it, it stays.
Just to be clear, I make no claims of having 'golden ears'.
However, I am curious to see whether I can hear any differences when placed under the pressure of test conditions.
Yeah, why not.
Maybe some others might do their own similar tests.
Sounds like a good starting place.
No, not courage, just curiosity. 🙂
For me, this is simply about whether I can hear differences under test conditions.
The result is unlikely to change my convictions nor cause me to stop trusting my ears.
Cheers,
Alex
The only pressure is could I be wrong? If you are truly willing to be wrong (or right) there is no pressure. Just have fun with it.Alex from Oz said:
Alex from Oz said:
It can be 'funny' this forum business. I was intending to get across something and trying not to put words in your mouth, and also trying to get across a 'reasonable' approach/interpretation of your position, yet due to whatever you can never quite pin it down enough ha ha.
Nonetheless, it leaves me a bit confused on you actual position...or maybe it is such a surprise to find a 'cable believer' admitting the possibility of being biased by factors such as looks or knowing which is which!!
You should be fighting on OUR side man!! ha ha 😀
Ok, that is a perfectly reasonable and balanced starting point, kudos. Have I ever mentioned here that it is the human nature side of things in this discussion that fascinates me?? 🙂 So it will be fascinating to see your reaction if you cannot tell the cables apart, and what may flow from that.
OR, it will be fascinating to see MY reaction if you can!! It works both ways you know.
Either way, fascinating and (hopefully) lot's of fun.
But as you may be aware, I have my doubts about enable too, so I feel that if you can clearly hear that effect then you should be able to hear cables. At least cable differences have an explanation!!
It will probably get to that stage, let's wait for a day or two and judge the help we may get from those following this discussion? then we can start that next step, how does that sound.
yeah, emphasis on the maybe, tending toward 'well blow me down, someone is actually going to step up to the plate!' (apart from you me bucko)
I hope that at least Andy will help us by scrutinizing the protocol and making it as foolproof as we can.
He seems to be on top of it all, we are mere amatuers. (sp)
I would much rather meet someone with curiosity, someone willing to learn. That is worth more than a LOT of other things.
But, can you explain WHY it would be unlikely to change your convictions (whichever way it goes)?? What ARE your convictions on this matter??
The answer to those questions will be illuminating, as on the face of it it does not seem to gell with the purported curious attitude..
It will be a blind test, you will not know which is which, that (seems) to be the only stipulation we have atm. You WILL be using your ears, and your ears ONLY.
So if you trust your ears NOW, surely you will trust your ears and the results they tell you when we do the test??
If so, why are you already 'making excuses' or 'backpedalling' or preparing some sort of groundwork for a result we are not yet aware of?
If you DO pick the cable (and I attest to that), I wonder if you will comehear and say 'sure I picked them 20/20 (say), but hey please do not put any faith in that cause I readily admit that even I do not trust my ears'??? Is that what you would say??
read post 3568 and 3672 and go back to that link to post6.doug20 said:
Note, I said hypothesis.
I'll say again.
It's not the cables that sound different.
It is the source and/or the receiver that changes in response to the new (reactive) loading that the cable has imposed.
terry j said:
Can I take it that you have not experimented with cables before?
terry j said:
I will never buy cables that I did not try on my system first.
terry j said:
Please don't change what was said, nobody said it is impossible to hear differences on an unknown system or that "the act of testing itself produces stresses such that the test always fails", it only make it harder to do,(based on personal experience) therefore the result can be questioned.
terry j said:
Again changing my words, I were talking about the tests that I've read but yes I have a good idea of what is important in a test.
At least if you come and visit, I have no problem changing cables on my system and I'm very confident that you will hear the differences.
terry j said:
What is your definition of 'trained'? A university degree perhaps?
Isn't it true that a blind person can 'hear better' than sighted people? Their ears doesn't change suddenly, the difference is in training the brain to detect and respond to the information detected by our ears. Nobody can do it for you, you have to develop it for yourself.
terry j said:
Surely sighted tests can be unreliable, it is however possible to learn to minimize other influences. I will surely not trust someone elses ears to decide what to buy although it is always interesting to hear the opinion of others.
terry j said:
Sorry, I don't understand your 'problem'. I've said before, there are no use to waste time with cables on a entry level 'hi-fi' system but it will also be a waste to ignore the effects of cables on a state of the art system.
terry j said:
Changing my words again.
terry j said:
I have no issue with cables being "hard to identify blind" but surely with impossible.
terry j said:
There are more than enough measurements done by now to show that cables can and do change the signal in a system.
terry j said:
So you agree that blind tests are flawed. 😀
terry j said:
I've tried to explain before why some claim to hear "massive" differences, it mainly depend on what each one of us regard as important to hear in a system. If detail and soundstage focus are important to you, the differences can be "massive" in that area. In the overall sound some may not even notice any change, although I've seen a few 'non-believers' that refused to believe the difference they hear were made by a cable change.
terry j said:
Not from copper to silver, both cables were copper, only the quality/structure of the copper were different. Yes, very noticeable to me on my system.
terry j said:
Hope I've been able to explain some of the problems.
Brett said:
The first few blind tests will be more difficult because it is something new to get used to. Doing a proper blind test is also a very demanding and tiring effort but surely worth it, especially once you see that you can achieve the same results by blind and sighted listening.
Even then. Look, people seem to have gotten excited about the fact that two cables can measure differently. So what? If the source is stable (as any good source will be) and the cables aren't something pathological (e.g., 10 meters of 40 gauge are excluded), the resulting system response deviations will be well below the thresholds of audibility.
There have been several papers written over the years demonstrating the magnitude of these effects. Unfortunately, they are not accessible for free. But some sims done by Peter Aczel are.
http://www.theaudiocritic.com/back_issues/The_Audio_Critic_16_r.pdf
Page 51.
What you can see from the graphs is that the frequency response changes within the audio band are small, even with some of the extremes in cable construction. In some cases, REALLY small. If there's no changes in the midband more than 0.1dB or so, one is unlikely to hear the difference, and even super-ear freaks will not be able to in the beloved long term tests. A 0.5dB variation at 20kHz will not be audible to anyone over the age of 25, and to damn few people under that age!
The author also correctly points out that a small amount of frequency change can be EQ'd out. So if for some reason I love the frequency response deviations of some exotic cable costing more than my car, I can achieve the same effects with a few cheap passive components.
Interestingly, the sims also show (no surprise) that all of the differences are swamped when the amp has a high source impedance. My tube power amp has an output Z of nearly an ohm, so perhaps that's why I'm apparently deaf, insensitive, and an all around spoilsport who clearly doesn't love music. Or maybe not.
If you think that a 3dB variation at 100kHz is audible, the burden of proof is on you.
I also note that these guys once cut open the potted network at the end of a highly regarded ultra-expensive cable and found... nothing.
look at the way a 10kHz square wave changes when a poorly compensated amplifier has different impedances hung on the end of it.
A bad amp will change it's sound (in the audible range) when it changes the signal that passes through it, due these changes in the stability margin.
It does not take much change in stability margin to have a profound effect on the sound.
A bad amp will change it's sound (in the audible range) when it changes the signal that passes through it, due these changes in the stability margin.
It does not take much change in stability margin to have a profound effect on the sound.
Andre Visser said:
Not as you surely mean the word, no. Of course I have happened to change cables many times, and indeed interconnects. And to be quite honest, I have not noticed any change at all.
In respect to speaker cable (the direct topic of the thread), i have chopped and change so much it is really quite hilarious.
It just so happened that this exact thing came up in another place, so I whipped out the camera and took a pic
My room is kinda odd, and I have experimented with a lot of positioning within the room of speakers, and quite frankly I find it a PITA to open up the speakons and affix the wires etc when I need to lengthen the cable for example.
So I simply resort to electrical connectors, or failing that wrap a bit of electrical tape around twisted wires.
After so much chopping and changing the wires are a bit...messy? ha ha
Please accept that if I changed what was said, it was unintentional. This whole process goes so much better when no-one is resorting to cheap tricks like that. However, I'll have to go back and look after posting to see where the mixup occurred ok? I cannot see it whilst replying.
I get that, not too sure of the whole truth of it. Similar question really to the one to Alex, if he managed to pass the test we intend to do, would you reject the result simply as it came form a test?
No?
But no doubt because it was a test, that would be sufficient to reject any failing of the test?? That was kinda the area I was going if indeed I misrepresented you.
Trust me, if I ever get to SA I WILL visit! Anyway, that reminded me that you asked earlier for a test that was done (no doubt there will be issues you have with it) but I tried to find the test done with Mike Lavigne on his opus transparent cables vs cheap monster cable, no luck. maybe I can find it another time tho I might quickly type THOSE words in now and see what happens.
Hmm, helps if you type the right words in eh?
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=941184
Note, mike was SO certain that he could tell the difference apart (remember the brouhaha over pear cables and the million dollar challenge??) that he indeed took the advice given by Randi of doing the test at home before applying for the prize (I guess some would realise that their gifts were not so real??)
So, this test was the actual test run for Mike before he applied for the million dollars. (at that time there was a lot of chest thumping going on, and the usual paranormal restrictions looked like they may have been lifted and so someone who could tell speaker cables apart could have won the million dollars)
If you do not wish to read it I can give a potted summary..
he failed. completely. totally. utterly.
I give the man his credit, he took it on the chin and did not really get into the usual (from a distance) making excuses game...well he did a little bit as time wore on, but you get what I mean. some snippets, read the thing to check that I am not cherry picking
And to cut to the chase, Mike could not identify the Monster from the Opus MM with any accuracy (nor the reverse, which also would have been a positive result if he had been consistently wrong) using our testing methodology. We stopped the test a little less than halfway through, I think we got through 8 A/Bs before we gave up........ After the test Mike was very gracious, and very fair and honest in accepting the result.
Most seemed to miss this bit-or at least it was not commented on.
So I think that's basically everyting that either side would want to know. And I'm sure there's plenty of ammunition for both. I can say now that I am of the opinion that speaker wire basically makes no significant difference in sound quality, given sufficient gauge. Even the 16gauge extension cord was fantastic. I am still open to the possibility of audible differences with speaker cable, however such differences must be quite small and very subtle.
They cut the end off an extension cord out of shear curiosity!!
anyway, please, no mention of any inadequacy of Mike Lavignes room or equipment please.
Sorry, you made mention that as the people who take these tests (and fail) are not trained, it was one of the many reasons why tests were flawed off the top of your head IIRC), NOT me.
I have absolutely no requirement that they be trained. I have yet to see any instance of those reporting cable differences being trained, yet those reports are accepted. But when someone sits down and does even a half arsed attempt at a rigorous test (far exceeding anything ever done by a reviewer or internet scribe)...and fails...suddenly YOU point out that they are not trained. Not me.
I might comment if I understood.
Ahh, now that IS the problem, do you not see?
This will no doubt come across as an arrogant statement, but I actually DO consider my system to be a state of the art system. Completely acknowledging any bias I may have as the owner, builder etc etc, but truthfully, I would put my system up against ANY other in the country.
I do not think I would necessarily 'win', but I am completely certain it would give one hell of a damn good showing. (and if we could somehow magically pull off a harmon kardon blind comparison, then yeah my prospects would go thru the roof, judged purely on the sound..I could be handicapped if they knew the speaker I was up against was worth half a million dollars for example)
so all possible (probable?) arrogance aside, you can clearly see form my picture above that I do not feel the lack of 'proper' cabling is a hinderance.
Man, I gotta get a life!!! I type so slowly, arrggh. I will skip a lot of the rest of your post ok? No offense.
whatever you are referring to I cannot see in the reply, but I did want to laugh with you, it's good we can have some fun too.
I actually wanted to pause here and say that I agree with you completely and fully understand what you are saying. It is very true indeed. One of the best explanations I have seen in this area came from a HK article from Toole (so it basically referred to speakers ok?). He pointed out (this is from vague memory) that we basically have a few 'descriptors' for sound, or the magnitude of differences in sound.
The trouble can come when we use those SAME words in all cases, from the obviously massive differences like a very small bookshelf speaker compared to a Rockport Arrakis, and us the SAME words for the subtle differences like going from copper to silver wire (say). A very quick and no doubt poor rendition of his actual words, but you understand what I meant??
And to be totally honest, that is at the heart of my 'problem' in this area. I am not saying cables cannot or do not make a difference, I fully accept that they can. But I take 'umbrage' when these necessarily small, subtle differences-if they truly exist-are described with the same words as the results of proper room treatment (my current gig, possibly why that was the first to pop out) or fixing the vastly more massive flaws in the speakers than we find anywhere else in the chain.
And what really 'irks' me is that as these products are so damn profitable for all concerned...manufacturers, retailers (due to mark up) magazines (advertising revenue) they are constantly pushed as important and put on some sort of equal footing as the things that REALLY do make a difference.
It is such a dead end!
IF you have your speakers fully sorted, IF you have the speaker/speaker room interface properly sorted, then yeah fine! go for the ever decreasing returns found in cables, and do it with my complete support.
In all likelihood, the guys found on diy are more knowledgeable than most, are more likely to have these important issues sorted, AND are more likely to make their own cables anyway!
But spare a thought for the poor average punter on a normal stereo forum would ya!!
there he is, limited funds (don't we all?), and the guys who have NEVER bothered to find ut for themselves just how audible cables are (or not) are being bombarded with the message from all sides that good (usually expensive) cables=speakers=speaker placement=room taming issues=etc etc etc.
It is a completely false order of importance, one as far as I can see pushed because a few can make a lot of money. who loses?? The majority, because instead of getting better speakers, or treating the room, or whatever, they spend a lot of their money on cables!!
You've read it. 'You should set aside twenty percent of your budget for cables' (or whatever the current figure is).
Pure bald greed, that is all it is. Easy money.
Poor buggers, that is all I can say, the vultures have got them.
Thanks andre for your openness.\
Ha ha ha, knew I had too much to drink! My message is too long, by heaps!! Will split it in two.
AndrewT said:
Then get a decent amp. Or fix the poor one. It's not that hard to make a stable amp; there are dozens of them at Best Buy. If the cheapie guys can do it, there's no excuse for a diyer or a high end manufacturer to not be able to do the same.
I note with extreme cynicism that there's far more likelihood of getting an incompetent amplifier for $20,000 than for $200. The worst amp I've ever listened to (and measured) was a French tube amp, highly praised by idiot reviewers, which cost as much as my apartment. Apparently they suffered a high failure rate, too, though this sample managed to make it through a day in my living room.
and that's the point I keep having to repeat.SY said:
Sort out the transmit end and the receiver end and the cables have virtually no effect at all, not even on the sound.
Pick an amp that does show changes in stability margin as the reactance is changed and some/many listeners will hear difference between some/many of the cables.
Some cables will give a preferred sound and some will be give a less than preferred sound.
That is not the cables they are hearing. That is the amplifier reacting to the changes in reactive loading.
Sy,
You are right. Fix the poor one.
AndrewT said:
How does this explain audible differences due to cables in zero nfb amps? In particular transformer coupled ones?
And zero nfb preamps without unstable topologies like cathode/emitter followers?
I don't know, but could this be the source impedance reacting with the receiver, i.e. the speaker?
Analog,
are you alleging that (all/some) zero NFB amps are impervious to output stability changes irrespective of the reactance of the load?
Analog,
are you alleging that (all/some) zero NFB amps are impervious to output stability changes irrespective of the reactance of the load?
Can you cite some verified sonic differences in these cases? Not "I heard it, I say so," but actual verified cases? With details in hand, it's much easier to explain without having to guess.
Terry j,
Sounds like a good time and should end in something interesting to report.
I have a suggestion -- not a very scientific one, but one that might help damp out some of the emotional baggage these tests tend to bring up. Please include in the test some absolutely abyssmal cable or interconnect, as defined by nonclassical characteristics, if those can be identified. Something as far from the advertised ideals as possible. Maybe the most lame tin-plate interconnect available from the hardware store; or better yet: something like a rusty piece of steel fence wire wrapped with plastic office adhesive tape dielectric and a shield/return wire made from picture frame hanger wire! Something that would be expected to be audible if anything is going to be. When that can be differentiated, it should minimize the intimidation factor by establishing that, ok, we are able to verify that something sounds different so the test can't be totally out of whack. (Or if it can't be differentiated, then that would be a good calibration point, too, I guess).
Probably best to avoid easily explainable (by classical electronics) differences such as resistance or inductance values that are a significant portion of the operating impedances, though.
Sounds like a good time and should end in something interesting to report.
I have a suggestion -- not a very scientific one, but one that might help damp out some of the emotional baggage these tests tend to bring up. Please include in the test some absolutely abyssmal cable or interconnect, as defined by nonclassical characteristics, if those can be identified. Something as far from the advertised ideals as possible. Maybe the most lame tin-plate interconnect available from the hardware store; or better yet: something like a rusty piece of steel fence wire wrapped with plastic office adhesive tape dielectric and a shield/return wire made from picture frame hanger wire! Something that would be expected to be audible if anything is going to be. When that can be differentiated, it should minimize the intimidation factor by establishing that, ok, we are able to verify that something sounds different so the test can't be totally out of whack. (Or if it can't be differentiated, then that would be a good calibration point, too, I guess).
Probably best to avoid easily explainable (by classical electronics) differences such as resistance or inductance values that are a significant portion of the operating impedances, though.
SY said:
Funny, I see real differences in the graphs, even he suggest that you use the shortest possible speaker cables and then in the end somehow, based on that same simulations🙄, he concluded that the cable isn't important.
bwaslo said:
Hosa? I bought a bundle of cheapo 1/4" trs for an experiment the other week. I ran a loopback test on them with RMAA and I was getting some measurable differences from the same group of cables. I probably should double check them to make sure it wasn't a fluke but I do remember quickly switching back to some stable interconnects to double check my soundcard wasn't going bad - which it wasn't, they matched with the good cables.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.