cliffforrest said:
Well, it certainly was educational for me, and probably some other people who are monitoring this thread. If it doesn't work for the cable naysayers or the people who can't extrapolate an informal experience without hardcore measurable scientifically repeatable process and data ... well, frankly I really don't care.
Connecters should fit the specific chassis connect
Its quite dissapointing to find that even expencive connectors fit poorly
These 30year old cheap nickel plated things have 100% perfect fit
I remember I once bought a cheap tube preamp kit, long time ago
They delivered cheap nickel plated chassis connectors
I asked them about this
They said it sounded better with those
Ofcourse I didnt believe them and bought my own cheap "gold" plated chassis connectors
Its quite dissapointing to find that even expencive connectors fit poorly
These 30year old cheap nickel plated things have 100% perfect fit
I remember I once bought a cheap tube preamp kit, long time ago
They delivered cheap nickel plated chassis connectors
I asked them about this
They said it sounded better with those
Ofcourse I didnt believe them and bought my own cheap "gold" plated chassis connectors
Attachments
Re: I don't beleive cables make a difference, any input?
no longer listening?
Profile For The Paulinator Search for all posts by this user.
Date Registered: 01-10-2002
Status: diyAudio Member
Offline
Total Posts: 305 (0.11 posts per day)
Last Post: 02-12-2009 08:08 PM
Acoustic Panel placement in a strange situation
Contact The Paulinator: Click here to email The Paulinator
Local Time: 08:43 PM
Last Seen Online: 02-12-2009 08:08 PM (150 days ago)
Biography Yeah baby
Location Spfld, OR
Interests audio, volleyball
Occupation Installer
The Paulinator said:
no longer listening?
Profile For The Paulinator Search for all posts by this user.
Date Registered: 01-10-2002
Status: diyAudio Member
Offline
Total Posts: 305 (0.11 posts per day)
Last Post: 02-12-2009 08:08 PM
Acoustic Panel placement in a strange situation
Contact The Paulinator: Click here to email The Paulinator
Local Time: 08:43 PM
Last Seen Online: 02-12-2009 08:08 PM (150 days ago)
Biography Yeah baby
Location Spfld, OR
Interests audio, volleyball
Occupation Installer
Of course cable differances exist, they have differant R, L and C. No one argues that fact. The argument is that you nor anyone else can hear the differance in decent cables of decent lenths, on decent gear. (By decent I mean cables that dont have riduculous price tags or stupid configurations/materials that start to act like filters).
Has anyone who "hears" the differance actually tested there own hearing by using a shelf EQ to subtract a half db above 15k? (what a typical decent cable will do if its long enough). I would like to meet the man that can hear this!
Re: Re: I don't beleive cables make a difference, any input?
Paulinating must be more fun.
tomtt said:
Paulinating must be more fun.
tinitus said:
Love them, bought bags of those connectors when RatShack was clearing out. 'Eichmann-style' low metallic content and possibly cheap and cheerful polystyrene shell from how easily they melt under the gun. I believe they're tin though, mine are 100% non-magnetic. Proving yet once again the objectivist claim that price is the primary determiner of perceived value. =D
Here an example why any true believer - be it the believe in his/her powers to distinguish between audio cable, power cables, be it in his/her "psychic" powers - never will be convinced by any blind test as to the nonexistence of his/her claimed powers:
http://skepticblog.org/2009/07/13/connies-conundrums/#more-3379
Always, and always, after a test whose conditions were agreed upon, the true believer - even after having signed statements that they agreed to the protocol before, and that the test was done appropriately after the test, but before the results were made public, convinced of their powers - never accepts any test, but rationalizes his failure to perform by claiming distracting circumstances, negative in fluences, hitherto undetectable bias etc.
Same old, same old, that why it does not make sense to engage in any test because EVERY test falsifying the hypothesis of audibility of cable differences will simply not be accepted, excuses will be forwarded and the wheel spins again.
Cable tests are in exactly the same league as any test concerning UFO's, psychic claims, crop circles etc.
It is a matter of tightly held beliefs of the anecdotal by those convinced of the "message" inherent of such experiences, and simply cannot be shaken, because the willingness to have ones belief questioned and examined and falsified is absent.
The belief lifts the believer above the "ordinary" into the realm of the exceptional - as demonstrated by certain participants here.
To give up such certainty means relinquishing part of ones carefully build up personality of the "guru" and "wise" guy" of the audio sphere.
http://skepticblog.org/2009/07/13/connies-conundrums/#more-3379
Always, and always, after a test whose conditions were agreed upon, the true believer - even after having signed statements that they agreed to the protocol before, and that the test was done appropriately after the test, but before the results were made public, convinced of their powers - never accepts any test, but rationalizes his failure to perform by claiming distracting circumstances, negative in fluences, hitherto undetectable bias etc.
Same old, same old, that why it does not make sense to engage in any test because EVERY test falsifying the hypothesis of audibility of cable differences will simply not be accepted, excuses will be forwarded and the wheel spins again.
Cable tests are in exactly the same league as any test concerning UFO's, psychic claims, crop circles etc.
It is a matter of tightly held beliefs of the anecdotal by those convinced of the "message" inherent of such experiences, and simply cannot be shaken, because the willingness to have ones belief questioned and examined and falsified is absent.
The belief lifts the believer above the "ordinary" into the realm of the exceptional - as demonstrated by certain participants here.
To give up such certainty means relinquishing part of ones carefully build up personality of the "guru" and "wise" guy" of the audio sphere.
I don't know that any Ayn Randian has said anything about wires one way or another.
The hifi rationalists (I would put myself in that category) have made a bigger deal of the connections than the wire, and good connections aren't terribly cheap- though the superb speaker terminals I've been using were picked up in a remainder sale at NHT... I guaran-damn-tee you that there's no "audiophile" wire cheaper than the orange Home Depot extension cords I use.
It would be interesting to test your assertion by taking the Recommended Components section of the Bible of Santa Fe and draw a scatter graph of price versus class. Wanna bet that the correlation coefficient is better than 0.5?
SY said:
??? I thought it was the white ones from Walmart that were the best. Silly me......
scott wurcer said:
<snare hit> Thank you folks! He's here all week. (Try the veal.) 😀
Andre, being aware of them should lead you to seek ways of negating their very powerful effects ie DBTs.Andre Visser said:
I don't know if it is possible to learn to do this but it could be quicker to just do a DBT
The real problem is people don't know that they can clearly hear things that are just not there ... almost sounds crazy but it is true.
A balanced system.
Fair enough. I think you did a unscientific test and when it confirmed your beliefs you stopped. A test that is scientific may or may not give the result you want but the result will be the truth. If you can correctly identify the difference between two cables in a scientific DBT test I am sure a technician would also be able to do the same without listening just by using measurements. I doubt that you are onto anything magical or unexplainable with cables. You could get the same results with a little eq. Make sure you amp is stable with these cables, and let us know the results you may surprise us.
Cheers
SY said:
Can't say, I haven't read much political fiction.
Not my assertion, it's a common accusation here no matter how many counter examples are posted. Interesting thought but analyzing the hifibible wouldn't mean much without comparison to a market mean of other product reviews; automobiles, restaurants, flights, and purple alcoholic beverages. My guess is Mercedes generally garners more accolades than Kia too (with the odd Caddy lambasting to spread the odds.)
Having both a Mercedes and a Kia (odd you picked those two!), I can personally testify that the low-price spread does just fine there, too.
SY said:
Santa Fe? That was so yesterday man! They are currently located on (who would have guessed?) Madison Avenue. Not that there's anything wrong with that!
My one issue with ABX/DBT type tests is that I have been at, seen results of, read about.. etc this type of test, where there were there could have been quite large measureable differences between the devices under test, but the test STILL came up with a null result.
PLEASE !!!!, would the dbt advocates come up with some sort of method for determining if a particular test is worth considering, other than, "oh! It was properly conducted". That is hardly a scientific explanation.
Until I see such a method, I can only see the whole discussion as pointless.
PLEASE !!!!, would the dbt advocates come up with some sort of method for determining if a particular test is worth considering, other than, "oh! It was properly conducted". That is hardly a scientific explanation.
Until I see such a method, I can only see the whole discussion as pointless.
Proof please.Andy G said:
Where are these tests and the measurements that prove your case?
You have made the claim, let's see some substance.
Ah PLEASE yourself. You have been REPEATEDLY asked to comment upon the flaws in DBT that are sooooo apparent to you, yet you have shown nothing in response. Not once, not ever. PUT UP OR SHUT UP.Andy G said:
You even had the opportunity to discuss this on another forum with Dr Sean Olive and again you did nothing to point out the flaws in DBT methodology, nor offer anything other than baseless assertion. You have even had someone who was willing to travel several hours and a fair distance so that you would be familiar with the system in test (yours) but you weaseled out of that too.
PUT UP OR SHUT UP.
SY said:
A good example.Maybe it is a good idea to call wine testers to have a taste of cables too.It would be easy for them the way you describe it.
@ Brett,
it´s a well known fact (at least among people conducting dbts), that quite large differences remain undetected if the participants are not used to the conditions of the specific test protocol (and maybe any test routine at all).
This seems to be true especially if a discrimination test was choosen, see for example the great stereophile test on amplifiers.
Still some very interesting articles on Dave Moultons website, in our case here i´d recommend:
http://www.moultonlabs.com/weblog/more/wacky_world_of_blind_testing
@ Andy_G,
up to certain degree, it is more a matter of good judgement if you want to evaluate the quality of a certain test protocol.
But very basically there is only one scientific method, which means that a test has to incorporate positive and negative controls to guard against the influence of possible confounders.
Of course, if prelimnary tests were conducted, so that the result of the real test is somewhat predictable, than it might be acceptable to use only positive or negative control.
For example, if your test gives a positive result (means that the nill hypothesis can be rejected), than it might be acceptable to only provide a negative control to ensure that only the EUT (effect under test) was the reason for the difference detected.
Otoh, if your test gives a negative result (means that the nil hypothesis can not be rejected), than it might be acceptable to only provide a positive control to ensure that the test reaches a sufficient sensitivity level to detect a comparable (small) effect as the EUT.
@ Scott Wurcer,
while i´m sure that in the cable industry often a quite standard design is just rebranded (with some changes in appearance labelling etc.) there are of course very unique version out there.
For example, afair there was no standard industry version comparable to the Ray Kimber designs; or just remember the Madrigal speaker cables constructed of two copper foil runs.
If a manufacturer is not able to invest big money for big coils of cables with kilometer lengths, but wants to develop a special cable design, then he has to look for small specialised cable manufacturers, who have smaller machinery and are specialised in manufacturing cables in quite small quantities.
In general, as "rebranding" is so common in nearly every market i sometimes don´t get it, why the audio business should be an exception in this modern selling game?!
it´s a well known fact (at least among people conducting dbts), that quite large differences remain undetected if the participants are not used to the conditions of the specific test protocol (and maybe any test routine at all).
This seems to be true especially if a discrimination test was choosen, see for example the great stereophile test on amplifiers.
Still some very interesting articles on Dave Moultons website, in our case here i´d recommend:
http://www.moultonlabs.com/weblog/more/wacky_world_of_blind_testing
@ Andy_G,
up to certain degree, it is more a matter of good judgement if you want to evaluate the quality of a certain test protocol.
But very basically there is only one scientific method, which means that a test has to incorporate positive and negative controls to guard against the influence of possible confounders.
Of course, if prelimnary tests were conducted, so that the result of the real test is somewhat predictable, than it might be acceptable to use only positive or negative control.
For example, if your test gives a positive result (means that the nill hypothesis can be rejected), than it might be acceptable to only provide a negative control to ensure that only the EUT (effect under test) was the reason for the difference detected.
Otoh, if your test gives a negative result (means that the nil hypothesis can not be rejected), than it might be acceptable to only provide a positive control to ensure that the test reaches a sufficient sensitivity level to detect a comparable (small) effect as the EUT.
@ Scott Wurcer,
while i´m sure that in the cable industry often a quite standard design is just rebranded (with some changes in appearance labelling etc.) there are of course very unique version out there.
For example, afair there was no standard industry version comparable to the Ray Kimber designs; or just remember the Madrigal speaker cables constructed of two copper foil runs.
If a manufacturer is not able to invest big money for big coils of cables with kilometer lengths, but wants to develop a special cable design, then he has to look for small specialised cable manufacturers, who have smaller machinery and are specialised in manufacturing cables in quite small quantities.
In general, as "rebranding" is so common in nearly every market i sometimes don´t get it, why the audio business should be an exception in this modern selling game?!
Andy G said:
Which then, logically, proofs that the measured differences are not audible. Whats' the problem here?
jd
- Status
- Not open for further replies.