It's official: all cables sound the same!

[carlosfm]

You are exactly making the point that the critical persons here make. You let a guy talk to you for a long time, letting him point out things HE choses, and then at the end, ahh, yes, now you see (hear). I would NEVER let anybody make my decisions for me this way...

If you think like that then you didn't understand anything of what I said, and you never will.
Do you think I'm influenced by **** talk?
Sorry to tell you, but you fail to understand what's a real test.
I arrived home right now, I was testing something.
What?
Nevermind.
Could you ever understand that a direct A-B test is really not necessary, it's even a nonsense, it doesn't let you appreciate the music, evaluate decently, concentrate?
Switching sources is for begginers.

I don't need anyone to tell me what sounds better, and that Andreas guy didn't do that.
He just asked people what sounded better.
He let people know the music that was playing.
He made blind and sighted tests.
And it was not an "audiophile" test CD like the ignorants like to play, it was a plain normal CD from Jeff Buckley ("Grace"), which I also have a home.
As I said, it was a very UNBIASED test, if you don't read or believe my words than there's no conversation possible.

You seem to be more worried in proving that all cables sound the same (!) 😱 , that a DSP is undetectable (!), and what's next?
All amps sound the same?
All CDPs sound the same?

It's amusing to see you search the net for all that kind of "literature", you blindly (pun intended) believe.
You believe all that those guys say (if it's to say that nobody noticed any difference) while you clearly show that you don't have experience, and you don't share YOUR experience with listening tests.
You try to show proofs but those are no proofs at all.
They are as reliable and believable as a Stereophile "class-A" rated CDP.

 

[pinkmouse]

I don't need anyone to tell me what sounds better, and that Andreas guy didn't do that.
He just asked people what sounded better.
He let people know the music that was playing.
He made blind and sighted tests.You believe all that those guys say (if it's to say that nobody noticed any difference)

Carlos.

You might want to read up on Neuro-Lingustic Programming and other similar techniques before you defend your listening tests with Linn further. That type of presentation is just so open to influence you wouldn't believe it.

 

[carlosfm]

You might want to read up on Neuro-Lingustic Programming and other similar techniques before you defend your listening tests with Linn further. That type of presentation is just so open to influence you wouldn't believe it.

Are you telling me that I was listening to a CD that I know well and was influenced by someone's talk?
If he didn't even say what was better or what was playing?
You should have been there to judge, as my words as lacking to explain any better than what I already did.
In the end he said what were we comparing to what.
But that was after everyone pointed out what sounded better.

I know a charlatan at a distance and I've testimonied to many listening tests with strange noises or vocal music that tells me nill about the performance of a system.
This guy played REAL music, with dynamics to spare and I could clearly see that the system was good, the source was good, the amps had real muscle to move those speakers.

 

[SY]

Are you telling me that I was listening to a CD that I know well and was influenced by someone's talk?

You are a human, aren't you? We're all influenced by subconscious biases and expectations- that's how a skilled conjurer entertains us. And that's why all sensory questions, hearing or otherwise, need to be tested with controls. We do this in the wine world all the time.

 

[carlosfm]

You are a human, aren't you? We're all influenced by subconscious biases and expectations- that's how a skilled conjurer entertains us.

The test was to compare two sources, what's all this talk about?😕
I repeat: we didn't know what was playing at any time.
The big room was dark, the players were absolutely identical, a Linn Unidisk 1.1 against a 2.1, as we found out in the end.
Even a deaf could clearly hear the difference between the two players.
It's not subtle, if you concentrate on the music.

 

[pinkmouse]

Are you telling me that I was listening to a CD that I know well and was influenced by someone's talk?

Yes

If he didn't even say what was better or what was playing?

Totally

But that was after everyone pointed out what sounded better.

One of the most straightforward and oldest conjuring tricks in the book.

This guy played REAL music, with dynamics to spare and I could clearly see that the system was good, the source was good, the amps had real muscle to move those speakers.

I'm sure they were.

 

[fdegrove]

Hi,

You are a human, aren't you?

Some of us....
O.K....Give the guy a break as he didn't say anything of the kind of what you're all reading.

Just a bad case of wishful thinking if you'd ask me....

Cheers, 😉

 

[audio-kraut]

If the listening to music is your main concern - why even argue about equipment?
If you state that certain things are audible - not only to you, but in general - than the argument starts and the first duty of those reading your comment is to question your assertions and compare your claims with ones own experience and the findings having been made by others.
Investigation can only be made by reading more than what has been written here, as corroborating evidence, and in this context i find your comment about postings of links supporting the non audibility of cable influences rather strange.
It is a well stated and proven fact by now that differences in cables cannot with certainty detected by in approbriate tests by the participants.
If you can supply me with other proof but your own highly subjective experiences - please do so, so far you have just stated personal and not very convincing experiences - that are on the level of personal beliefs and nothing more.
Wer are in a forum that is concerned with diy of electronic equipment for audio, and not a confessional for any believers. If you want to believe - that is your problem, if you want to discuss , personal believes do not hold much water if they cannot be corroborated.

The big room was dark, the players were absolutely identical, a Linn Unidisk 1.1 against a 2.1, as we found out in the end.

If the players were identical - why would they sound different? Or do you mean to say no optical cue was available that those players were different models?

I can agree that players can sound different - depending on their analogue section, as i have myself experienced in comparisons between a denon 1520, a micromega stage two and a philips 963.

Still, we are discussing cables, and although i have experienced differences in cables ranging between 25$ - 200$,in extensive listening test at home, i can with certainty say that i would not be able in a blind test to identify those cables. The differences are that small and subtle in my experience.
So - why worry and spend more than one has to, to ensure a good connection between equipment?

 

[carlosfm]

If they players were identical - why would they sound different? Or do you mean to say no optical cue was available that those players were different models?

Exactly.
They look absolutely identical.

Now let's all think about that DSP thing.
To get to a DSP the signal passes through an analog/buffer stage and ADC.
Then it goes to a DAC, I/V, analog filtering/buffer.
Can you believe that all this is undetectable to a direct connection?
Unbelievable.

 

[audio-kraut]

Then it goes to a DAC, I/V, analog filtering/buffer.
Can you believe that all this is undetectable to a direct connection?

You can do it differently - stay in the digital domain with the digital output signal from the player until you feed the power amps. That avoids a lot of d/a and a/d to d/a conversion. And do it in 24/96 - try it.

 

[fdegrove]

Hi,

It is a well stated and proven fact by now that differences in cables cannot with certainty detected by in approbriate tests by the participants.

IMO that's mainly because those tests suck at what they're out to prove though.

I too believe and know that cables not only measure different, they do sound different from each other too....
However, how does one actually prove the sound of something?

Sometimes infinitissimally small measured differences seem to make for more "subjective" difference than we give these small figures credit for.
Our ears and brain can be very fine instruments indeed, ones that we can sharpen and refine to incredible levels.
Any blind person can confirm that....

Cheers, 😉

 

[carlosfm]

Our ears and brain can be very fine instruments indeed, ones that we can sharpen and refine to incredible levels.

They can.
But unfortunately we are praying in the desert.
Maby someone could put a thing called soundstage on a graph?😀

Any blind person can confirm that....

Absolutely, they really need them.
Good listening goes with experience.

 

[audio-kraut]

IMO that's mainly because those tests suck at what they're out to prove though.

The funny thing is - most of those tests - be it in the us or in europe - were in the majority designed and run by those believing in clearly being able to identify cables. And they regularly flunked those tests. Doesn' speak well of either their ability to identify cables in bt or their ability to design a test accomodating their abilities.

Lets throw the argument back to where it belongs - cable sound for me is of no concern as shown by experience. If someone wants to sell me a cable that can enhance the sound of my equipment by being more "non intrusive" in passing the signal - he better prove to me if that is really audible - thats up to the industrie, not up to me as a consumer. So far the industry has not being able to do that, the onus was on the cable enthusiats to show the validity of the industries claim. Wrong approach. If they want to sell, they better prove the validity of their sometimes outrages claims to me.

 

[fdegrove]

Hi,

Doesn' speak well of either their ability to identify cables in bt or their ability to design a test accomodating their abilities.

I concur but I think it's not too hard to understand that given the nature of the DUT (sound differences) it's hardly ever conclusive either way, whether the DUT is a cable or an amp or some similar sound reproducing device.

However, it's equally hard to imagine that in all those years customers do get suckered in if there were to be no difference at all.
If that were to be the case we'd all be listening to amp X on speaker Y using cable Z, etc.
Music is and always will be a subjective experience, all humans perceive it in a different way and that alone justifies the plethora of different brands on the market.
If they'd all sound the same it wouldn't make much sense, would it?

Cheers, 😉

 

[audio-kraut]

that in all those years customers do get suckered in if there were to be no difference at all.

And what about the believe the car is the ultimate vehicle for personal transportation? That's been going on for over hundred years.😉

Probably coming to an end within a few decades - peak oil is showing its unpleasant face.

 

[SY]

However, it's equally hard to imagine that in all those years customers do get suckered in if there were to be no difference at all.

Homeopathy.

ESP.

Space aliens.

Astrology.

Crystal energy.

Perpetual motion.

Scientology.

Dowsing.


Longevity of belief is no indication of veracity.

 

[carlosfm]

Homeopathy.

ESP.

Space aliens.

Astrology.

Crystal energy.

Perpetual motion.

Scientology.

Dowsing.


Longevity of belief is no indication of veracity.

Speaker cables can make a huge difference, more than interconnects (if your source has low output impedance).
But then again, in front of a clear and shockingly audible evidence I should think to myself if I'm being invaded by some extraterrestrial power that controls my mind.

Wait... beautiful girl in front of me.
Can't be.
I need a proof.
😀

 

[fdegrove]

Hi,

Longevity of belief is no indication of veracity.

Probably not but the opposite sure isn't a good sign either...

Is that a wishlist you made?

Almost all items on it could be proven to work, exist, whatever applies, given time.
Scientology however, I do have reservations on that one....

I'm well aware of the brainwashing done at most universities, especially the more science oriented ones but sometimes it's really mindboggling....
Wasn't it thanks to Einstein's vivid imagination he came up with such brilliant theories in the first place?

Do the tubes, in casu, the ECC88s etc, sound good because they measure well or do they happen to sound good because the measurements just confirmed what you believed they would?

Let me tell you how it happened in my case; I only made the measurements after I discovered through listening tests how well they sounded....
Different strokes for different folks, I suppose....

I rest my audiocase........

Cheers, 😉

 

[audio-kraut]

Wait... beautiful girl in front of me.

According to your taste - but do you know mine?

Almost all items on it could be proven to work, exist, whatever applies, given time.

Yes, and atlantis has been found, aliens have invaded the earth, esp works every time - saw it on tv, astrology guides my life, my car runs without fuel through perpetual motion - you really believe that could be proven to exist, do you?, crystal on top of my amp clear up the sound stage tremendously, scientology invades hollywood (not any more, since madonna left the building to join the talmud /thora crowd), my dog gets healed after every bear attack by homeopathy and my life is fulfilled through the many believes i have to hold at the same time - prost, as I used to say.

if your source has low output impedance

as any decent solid state amp should have.

 

[jan.didden]

Hi,IMO that's mainly because those tests suck at what they're out to prove though.[snip]

Fred,

You may well be right, it is no sinecure to devise a test taken care of all parameters that might influence the outcome.

But how do they do that in those casual, subjective, sighted tests? If you assume that those tests DO give valid results, by your own logic, those tests are proper, well designed. What is then done right what is done wrong in a blind, objective, controlled test?

Jan Didden