At the time I tried such a thing,I think the woofer wire was 11awg,the mid/high was 16awg and amp was solid state.Compared to the same set up but a 11awg wire for the mid/high speaker input(in place of 16awg),I think even Randi would refuse to "bet" 🙂.Lengths were not more than 3m each side.It is a very easy thing to try for any one.
SY,
If these are the protocols you're refering to:
==========================================================
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.
==========================================================
Then I'd have absolutely no problem submitting to a DBT run in such a fashion, provided the wires are switched manuelly and it's done on a audio system & in a room I'm both initimately familiar with.
Thetubeguy1954
~Rational Subjectivism. It's An Acquired Taste!~
If I can figure out a way to get over to Florida for a day or two, we'll do it on your system. Familiar enough? 😀
Fascinating!
I've been contemplating doing something very much like this.
It will be arduous waiting for the results to come in.
I've been contemplating doing something very much like this.
It will be arduous waiting for the results to come in.
Yeah, I can't say my experience with receivers and processors is much different. Almost every one I hear is too "digital". So it was one of those things that if you want it done right well...
I can see how it would be hard if you had to get executive approval for some of the things I mess with. Similar to mixing with reverbs I like to keep things very subtle if I do mess around with the sound field at all. And well that could be very hard to sell to an executive - something you can't obviously hear.
Anyway great news that we might get a test going here 😀 I am pretty sure I can borrow a vehicle if you guys just need someone to swap cables or whatever. Let me know. Really I make jokes about pebbles and stuff but I am open to both sides of the argument to a certain extent.
It's not dead flat to 17 kHz with a sudden droop, the response starts a long slow drop around the tweeter crossover. With 12 metres of cable I suspect it would be immediately obvious on white noise.
So I understand you are discounting resistance as a factor in what you have observed. To my mind there only remains C and L.
To cut to the chase, I'm guessing you are of the mind that some yet to be measured property of the cables will explain what you hear.
I don't think you will get the research you need until someone like your good self can demonstrate that there is actually something to investigate. 🙂
Hi
I don't think the skin effect should be invoked for audio frequencies.
If you use thicker cables for MF/HF than LF I would expect the balance of any speaker to be affected because of R alone. You wouldn't want to waste copper like this.
On using thinner wire for the HF on 2 ways with a high crossover point there is no argument as with a higher crossover point there is less current being drawn from the amp through that cable . Can be explained with Ohm's Law.
If the audible differences are very obvious I would expect the measured differences to be likewise..........unless there is something spooky going on, which you and Andre seem to be suggesting. We all like the spooky experiences we can enjoy whilst listening to our systems, but they are in the head not in non spooky physical objects, methinks. 🙂
According to the manufacturer of the two cables,R=0.0132 ohm/3m(11awg cable) and 0.0423 ohm/3m(16awg cable).Both were stranded,19 silver plated strands each,teflon insulated......and blue colour🙂
Now that really is spooky! How the hell did you know that blue is my favourite color? I'm getting worried. 😱
Edit: OK not R.
Last edited:
Champ where are you located? I'm located in sunny Orlando, Florida. If you could arrange to be here you'd be welcome to observe the test or take part as one of the "officials" who make sure everything's done correctly!
I'm pretty confident that I'll pass this test and the heads of the disbelievers will be 
I do however, predict that should I pass the test they'll start downplaying the results of the test with comments about the test being statistically insignificant! However the fact of the matter is this; Even if the test is statistically insignificant, the test itself would be very significant in it's revelation of the fact that although hundreds of thousands of other audiophiles/music lovers cannot detect differences in wires, there are those audiophiles/music lovers amongst us who can. Truth be told I don't really want to discuss, argue or debate this topic any longer. I'm ready to take a test and prove I know, not I believe, I can hear differences in wires. Furthermore let me be perfectly clear of what I'm speaking about when I talk about wires or cables, ok? I'm talking about the lengths you typically see in the vast majority of audio systems. Thus if I'm speaking about interconnects, I'm talking about ICs that are 1 to 6 feet. (my ICs are approx 3 feet) When it's speaker wires I'm speaking about speaker wires that are 5 to 15 feet on each side. (my speaker wires are approx 7-8 feet each side) Finally for power cords I'm refering to wires that are 3-9 feet (my power cords are approx 5-6 feet) So none of these lengths of wire are out of the ordinary.
Thetubeguy1954
~Rational Subjectivism. It's An Acquired Taste!~
Well, being in frigid Chicago, its not likely I could make it down to witness. But I've already bookmarked this thread in anticipation.
Having just discovered this thread today I have spent the better part of the day working my way through from the beginning. Painful it was but also enlightening. This subject can be found on many forums around the net but I've yet to run across one that showed such class and patience as what has been shown by the likes of TubeGuy and SY here. Kudos especially to you two. But also to the few others who followed suit.
My experiences parallel TubeGuy in so many ways. I started a non believer. Then had an experience that I couldnt explain. Then spent a long time and effort testing in anyway I could conceive to get me real answers. Along the way I wanted only the truth and saw no point in lying to myself.
Long story short, I find myself in the exact same place as TubeGuy at this point. Given that I am working with a familiar system with equally familiar music I have proven to myself the ability to discern differences between cables. Not ALL cables, mind you. Regardless of price there are many that really dont differ all that much. And I'll be the first to admit that there is something seriously wrong with the current state of cable marketing and pricing. AND the manufacturers have mostly themselves to blame.
But over the last few years I've had the distinct advantage of gaining access to all of the most famous $$$ brands out there and listening to them for various periods of time. And after several years of comparing these things I do indeed consistently perceive differences and I'm even starting to see trends in the performance that correlate to specific design parameters. (such as geometry)
I dont want to drop into this thread and distract attention away from those who have invested here for several months. But my main listening "system" is headphone based and as such is somewhat portable. So it is conceivable that restraints set by both sides of the debate could be met. Perhaps there is a centralized place where people from both sides would naturally tend to meet that something like this could take place.
I know headphone enthusiasts have several "Can Jam"s during the year. Maybe something like this?
I guess what I'm saying is this. I too am confident in my ability to hear differences in cables and am willing to put this to the test. I am also open to and welcome input from the skeptics on how do this.
It seems to me that SY is somewhat of an authority on conducting DBT. I am particularly interested in his input on how a test could be administered using my own equipment in a neutral location.
Having just discovered this thread today I have spent the better part of the day working my way through from the beginning. Painful it was but also enlightening. This subject can be found on many forums around the net but I've yet to run across one that showed such class and patience as what has been shown by the likes of TubeGuy and SY here. Kudos especially to you two. But also to the few others who followed suit.
My experiences parallel TubeGuy in so many ways. I started a non believer. Then had an experience that I couldnt explain. Then spent a long time and effort testing in anyway I could conceive to get me real answers. Along the way I wanted only the truth and saw no point in lying to myself.
Long story short, I find myself in the exact same place as TubeGuy at this point. Given that I am working with a familiar system with equally familiar music I have proven to myself the ability to discern differences between cables. Not ALL cables, mind you. Regardless of price there are many that really dont differ all that much. And I'll be the first to admit that there is something seriously wrong with the current state of cable marketing and pricing. AND the manufacturers have mostly themselves to blame.
But over the last few years I've had the distinct advantage of gaining access to all of the most famous $$$ brands out there and listening to them for various periods of time. And after several years of comparing these things I do indeed consistently perceive differences and I'm even starting to see trends in the performance that correlate to specific design parameters. (such as geometry)
I dont want to drop into this thread and distract attention away from those who have invested here for several months. But my main listening "system" is headphone based and as such is somewhat portable. So it is conceivable that restraints set by both sides of the debate could be met. Perhaps there is a centralized place where people from both sides would naturally tend to meet that something like this could take place.
I know headphone enthusiasts have several "Can Jam"s during the year. Maybe something like this?
I guess what I'm saying is this. I too am confident in my ability to hear differences in cables and am willing to put this to the test. I am also open to and welcome input from the skeptics on how do this.
It seems to me that SY is somewhat of an authority on conducting DBT. I am particularly interested in his input on how a test could be administered using my own equipment in a neutral location.
Terrific. The results of these can be found where? Of particular interest would be positives for wires and cables, for a bit of peer review (already done?). Thanks.
I simply posted it as available on analog LP, not because of the weight. It was Andre who suggested this recording, as one (used by him) of sufficient resolution to "hear" wires, etc. and their masking effect on details, loss of soundstage, etc., when "good" and "bad" varieties are inserted. I like what I hear so far, being familiar with live versions of the instruments. Once again, some sort of reference is desirable for repeatability if others are to hear the goodness of good wires in their particular system. You claim objective reasons (even if invalid, such as skin effect) for what you hear. This implies (system) repeatability.
Unlike wires, dynamic limitations due to thermal compression are quite easy to hear. I probably don't listen any louder (averaged SPL) than you do. It's just that real life sounds (including acoustic instruments) tend to be uncompressed. Is realism one of your system goals?
Like you, I also have systems with W series (22) Seas (minus the box restrictions). The mids on the 12 are fine. The 97db sensitivity provides a system low level linearity magnifying glass effect that a lower sensitivity system (like yours) cannot provide.
I have 12 and 14 awg. Sorry, no more or less definition from the marginal R increase.
Well, it doesn't seem like you have practiced an actual DBT on your current system, but that's ok, since SY is willing to test irregardless and you are confident based on what trials you have done. Kudos to you for stepping up to the plate.
IIRC, there was a Maynard from Florida at a Lexington DIY event where I demoed one of my systems, so we may have someone who has heard both (of ours). Or it may have been someone different, not sure.
If there is room and I don't provide a distraction, I would certainly attend (schedule allowing of course).
You can thank Andre for that CD suggestion. I think it would be excellent for hearing system details, for reasons stated previously. I'm sure you would want music you are intimately familiar with for the DBT, but if you acquire the disc and the test doesn't occur until another month (spring?) or so, who knows?
I would imagine if the differences between cables/wires are audible (for non-LCR reasons), then it might be detectable even with modest familiarity with the music.
cheers,
AJ
AJ you're 100% correct in your belief that I haven't done a DBT on my present system. I've long ago convinced myself that sonic differences in IC of 3-6 feet, speakers wires of 5-15 feet and with great difficulty power cords of 3-9 feet, do exist! So I see no need these days to do anything but sighted tests. I still remain very confident of my ability to detect differences in wires on my present system. Hopefully SY won't be coming within the next week or two because I've just upgraded on 12/22/09 my 6 year old solid-state, Bluenote Stibbert CD player for their new GoldeNote tubed, 24 bit/192kHz DAC, Stibbert CD player. However as I believe I'm hearing greater resolution with the new CDP I suppose it wouldn't matter if SY came anyway.
I believe it is in fact the same Maynard we are speaking of. He loves building speakers. If he spoke of his Aikido amp at all with you, he probably mentioned replacing the 5687 tubes with the 7044's he's now using in it. That occured when Maynard first visited my home and I explained how I replaced the 5687 tubes with Bendix 6900 tubes in my Mastersound and what an improvement that made. I actually gave Maynard a pair of 6900's to try in his amp. Unfortunately as much as Maynard liked what he heard, the 6900 tubes are quite expensive, but luckliy Maynard discovered the 7044's tubes which actually have about 75% of the 6900's presentation. I can see where someone could prefer either tube. Personally I prefer using the 6900's. I do have a pair of 7044's lying around though.
AJ as your behavior towards me seems to have vastly improved and I do try to be a forgiving person, you just might get an invitation after all! I'm hoping to have Maynard over next week with my friend Mike to hear the new Goldnote CD player. I'd like to ask him about you, that is if he remembers you, to see what his impression of you was. Now as far as the Holly Cole CD is concerned, I thank both you and Andre for telling me about her. I liked what I heard. I have some CD's by Sophie Milman is a Russian born jazz vocalist who currently lives in Canada that would serve the purpose just as well. You can check Sophie out here: Sophie Milman - Take Love Easy - CAN. May 05, 2009 | U.S. June 2, 2009 I love her self-titled debut CD and her CD "Make Someone Happy" With Sophie's latest CD "Take Love Easy" I'm just starting to listen to it and haven't yet formed an opinion on it. Of course we could always use Karrin Allyson's CD. Karrin Allyson - Grammy Nominated Jazz Artist I have her CD "Wild for You" that I just love, but I believe Sophie's CD's are better recordings.
==========================================================
Finally to Cal Weldon. The word irregardless was one my father used quite often, that never seemed to make sense to me. A prefix is something that's attached to the beginning of a word that changes that word's meaning. For Example if we use the prefix ir with a word it will make it mean just the opposite:
ir + rational = irrational or not rational
ir + regular = irregular or not regular
ir + recoverable = irrecoverable or not recoverable
ir + relevant = irrelevant or not relevant
Not take the word regardless. It means taking no regard or heed; heedless. Thus, ir + regardless = irregardless should therefore mean the opposite, thus taking regard or heed should seem to be the appropriate meaning but, it's not. English be the strange language it is irregardless & regardless actually mean the same thing. According to Merriam-Webster dictionary:
Main Entry: ir·re·gard·less
Pronunciation: \ˌir-i-ˈgärd-ləs\
Function: adverb
Etymology: probably blend of irrespective and regardless
Date: circa 1912
nonstandard : regardless
Usage Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that “there is no such word.” There is such a word, however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead.
With that I've been listening to music since 12 noon on 12/23/09 and it's now 2:34am est on Christmas eve. So I'm taking a pain pill and going to sleep, just before I shut off and unplug the audio system.
Thetubeguy1954
~Rational Subjectivism. It's An Acquired Taste!~
well done to all concerned!
wish we could get a volunteer over here, but instead we will watch with interest the outcome of this cable test.
do you have two cables/interconnects TG that you are already confident you can identify blind? I would imagine SY would have to make a 'quick' visit, so if you had those two cables already identified then that is one time waster out of the way.
You mentioned a possible 'doubters' response if you managed to ID the cables blind. AFAIK there would really only be one major objection/doubt, ''just how well conducted was the test?"
But that eventuality is presumably covered by SY helping out here...I for one would set my mind at rest regarding protocol knowing SY was in charge.
All that is left (as far as I am concerned) is 'are the cable parameters such that any audible difference is understandable?'..that would mean a measurement either before or after.
IF the cables were within tolerance so to speak, and you still heard differences under a well conducted test, well then yes, we are talking interesting stuff!!!
Looking forward to it!!
wish we could get a volunteer over here, but instead we will watch with interest the outcome of this cable test.
do you have two cables/interconnects TG that you are already confident you can identify blind? I would imagine SY would have to make a 'quick' visit, so if you had those two cables already identified then that is one time waster out of the way.
You mentioned a possible 'doubters' response if you managed to ID the cables blind. AFAIK there would really only be one major objection/doubt, ''just how well conducted was the test?"
But that eventuality is presumably covered by SY helping out here...I for one would set my mind at rest regarding protocol knowing SY was in charge.
All that is left (as far as I am concerned) is 'are the cable parameters such that any audible difference is understandable?'..that would mean a measurement either before or after.
IF the cables were within tolerance so to speak, and you still heard differences under a well conducted test, well then yes, we are talking interesting stuff!!!
Looking forward to it!!
I only mentioned skin effect as a possible reason(or one of the possible reasons besides RLC),since R difference between a 11awg and 16awg over 3m cable runs cannot convince about the heard difference when used on the HF input of a biwireable speaker.Also your comment about the nearly no difference using 12 and 14 awg cables,almost seems to agree with mine.Change the 14awg with say 16awg on the MF/HF input and keep or increase the 12awg to 10 awg and see if anything changes in sound.I am confident you will hear a difference,that is bigger than measurements might suggest.Have you ever heard of anyone who uses 16awg on woofer input and 10awg on HF?Why not?
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.