@scott wurcer,
I can accept it (just a matter of live experience, where humans are acting there most likely exists some kind of fraud too) , but nevertheless think that there must be some hard evidence be presented if you accuse someone of fraud. Isn´t fraud connected to consciously wrongdoing for the purpose?
Mark Waldrep did wrote similar posts a couple of years ago (different manufacturer) where he only had his subjective perception of level differences but posted it as facts. After receiving one of those "cease and desist letters" he withdraw the posts which was imo a reasonable move.
Somewhere it seems so, but he wrote the "ordinary iec cord" was 2.5 dB lower in lever than the other, additionally he wrote that the most expensive cable was "substantially louder" than the other two "quite" expensive from the competitor guy.
Does "substantially louder" equals also 2-3 dB higher level? Is it more or less?
Are we talking about a range overall - from ordinary to most expensive - from 5 dB and more or less?
According to the blogpost Mark Waldrep loaded the recorded music samples (from his description i got the impression he only recorded the music but not the talk in the power cable case, while he recorded the whole MQA session) to Audobe Audition for synchronizing and analyzing. As he kept his recording device out of view, did he do the analysis on the fly in the room or later?
The other guy whispering had allegedly seen 2 dB , but for which difference? The difference between ordinary iec and the others or between the most expensive and the two other "pricey" cables? Did he use it as sound level meter with peak hold, averaging mode dbA or dbC?
We don´t know nothing about the audio circuit that was used to demonstrate the "mains cable difference" also the mains nose was, according to the description, somehow shown but not mentioned which way.
To be clear, it might have been fraud, it could have just nonintentionally (means incompetence) it could have been some measurement uncertainty.
I hope we can agree that the description isn´t as precise and thorough as you would like it as clear evidence for fraud.
Given the other event happened a couple of years ago and that he knows about the potential legal troubles following, i wonder that he wasn´t more straight forward and to the point with the data and his description of this event. (But of course it could be that just had not shown everything he has)
And i would have thought that he would talk with his good friends, who were doing the convention, about the nonsense of comparisons not controlled in level adjustments. If nobody reacts to the complaints or suggestions there is still room for other actions, like the one he has posted.
@hudelson2,
Filtering out voltage variations is unlikely but filtering out mains-grid-bound high frequency (potentially interfering) isn´t difficult at all.
It´s about physics or electrical engineering and the price is no indiciator for the construction details.
Surely it is imo impossible to justify a price tag of 17000 $ with technology or materials, but - depending on the frequency range taken into consideration - to get a HF attentuation of at least 6 dB isn´t that difficult or costly at all.
But that does not mean a level difference at the analog output of the device (normally,without knowing what was used for the demonstration i can´t rule it out, but would consider it as unlikely)
I can accept it (just a matter of live experience, where humans are acting there most likely exists some kind of fraud too) , but nevertheless think that there must be some hard evidence be presented if you accuse someone of fraud. Isn´t fraud connected to consciously wrongdoing for the purpose?
Mark Waldrep did wrote similar posts a couple of years ago (different manufacturer) where he only had his subjective perception of level differences but posted it as facts. After receiving one of those "cease and desist letters" he withdraw the posts which was imo a reasonable move.
Somewhere it seems so, but he wrote the "ordinary iec cord" was 2.5 dB lower in lever than the other, additionally he wrote that the most expensive cable was "substantially louder" than the other two "quite" expensive from the competitor guy.
Does "substantially louder" equals also 2-3 dB higher level? Is it more or less?
Are we talking about a range overall - from ordinary to most expensive - from 5 dB and more or less?
According to the blogpost Mark Waldrep loaded the recorded music samples (from his description i got the impression he only recorded the music but not the talk in the power cable case, while he recorded the whole MQA session) to Audobe Audition for synchronizing and analyzing. As he kept his recording device out of view, did he do the analysis on the fly in the room or later?
The other guy whispering had allegedly seen 2 dB , but for which difference? The difference between ordinary iec and the others or between the most expensive and the two other "pricey" cables? Did he use it as sound level meter with peak hold, averaging mode dbA or dbC?
We don´t know nothing about the audio circuit that was used to demonstrate the "mains cable difference" also the mains nose was, according to the description, somehow shown but not mentioned which way.
To be clear, it might have been fraud, it could have just nonintentionally (means incompetence) it could have been some measurement uncertainty.
I hope we can agree that the description isn´t as precise and thorough as you would like it as clear evidence for fraud.
Given the other event happened a couple of years ago and that he knows about the potential legal troubles following, i wonder that he wasn´t more straight forward and to the point with the data and his description of this event. (But of course it could be that just had not shown everything he has)
And i would have thought that he would talk with his good friends, who were doing the convention, about the nonsense of comparisons not controlled in level adjustments. If nobody reacts to the complaints or suggestions there is still room for other actions, like the one he has posted.
@hudelson2,
Filtering out voltage variations is unlikely but filtering out mains-grid-bound high frequency (potentially interfering) isn´t difficult at all.
It´s about physics or electrical engineering and the price is no indiciator for the construction details.
Surely it is imo impossible to justify a price tag of 17000 $ with technology or materials, but - depending on the frequency range taken into consideration - to get a HF attentuation of at least 6 dB isn´t that difficult or costly at all.
But that does not mean a level difference at the analog output of the device (normally,without knowing what was used for the demonstration i can´t rule it out, but would consider it as unlikely)
Last edited:
Yeah but the question is Pano would you really want to go to a concert in Australia to see a legally safe knockoff of a band that you like? With the strong smell of cheap wine in the air Or would you rather go and see the real thing?
Also.
I mean I'm a huge fan of Rammstein but I wouldn't go to a Rammstein concert.
Same goes for Die Antwoord., Slipknot, Taylor Swift, Justin Bieber.
I guess what I'm trying to say is, some songs are best left enjoyed at a distance from the original author.
Also.
I mean I'm a huge fan of Rammstein but I wouldn't go to a Rammstein concert.
Same goes for Die Antwoord., Slipknot, Taylor Swift, Justin Bieber.
I guess what I'm trying to say is, some songs are best left enjoyed at a distance from the original author.
Last edited:
Thanks for the link!
Seems that Bob Levi somehow realized that an event named "bunch of guys meets for serious listening test of different mains cables" might be not so attractive (radical new thinking)
.Major part of the problem is the fact that the discussion starts after the "incident" has happened.
I am pretty sure that I'd have raised my voice instantly when I'd heard an increase in playback level after switching of whatever part in the reproduction chain, but that's me....
Instantly asking the demonstrator to recheck his set-up might have prevent these things from happening.
In case of the demonstrator not willing to recheck, we face fraud.
I am pretty sure that I'd have raised my voice instantly when I'd heard an increase in playback level after switching of whatever part in the reproduction chain, but that's me....
Instantly asking the demonstrator to recheck his set-up might have prevent these things from happening.
In case of the demonstrator not willing to recheck, we face fraud.
Try it yourself with this tone generator, not too hard.
Custom Sine Tones | Audio Test File Generator
Having read that article about Bob Levi, I can see even more clearly his motivation. He has to rely on the good will of vendors to put on shows. Just like magazines need advertising revenue. You don't bite the hand that feeds you, nor do you let anyone else bite it. (Yes, I've been part of a sponsored room at T.H.E. Show)
That cable "manufacturers" resort to this sort of thing shouldn't be surprising.
It's all about marketing, and there's all kinds of self-deception and intellectual dishonesty at work in this crazy industry. Bob Levi clearly has an agenda and is part of the marketing.
Ultimately, it's the fault of gullible baby-boomer audiophiles continuing to purchase the products. This is an industry/consumers that's shot itself in the foot for years.....and I don't see any signs of it stopping.
Dave.
It's all about marketing, and there's all kinds of self-deception and intellectual dishonesty at work in this crazy industry. Bob Levi clearly has an agenda and is part of the marketing.
Ultimately, it's the fault of gullible baby-boomer audiophiles continuing to purchase the products. This is an industry/consumers that's shot itself in the foot for years.....and I don't see any signs of it stopping.
Dave.
I still think the blogger guy is on the higher road, but maybe would be better if before the comparison he asked "ok if I record this or do a level check"? Then either there would be a "no" (meaning: engage disbelief engines) or doing so would prevent the purposeful or (possibly) unintended fraud. As I mentioned earlier, it's sort of human nature to up the volume a bit to try to hear a difference, and there's nothing to compare to for the first audition run.
This is the most succinct description of the industry I've ever read. Hi fi salesmen are on par with shady used car salesmen. They'll say anything they think they can get away with, exploiting any ignorance the consumer displays.
And the consumers are willfully ignorant, believing any voodoo that sounds good to them. It cracks me up when people that have spent enormous sums first hear my humble, home built equipment. Some simply don't believe it's real, like a hoax. They think I have "real" equipment hidden, or something like that. My neighbor, who spent several thousand dollars on Bose equipment so you know he knows what he's talking about, insists that my preamp must be digital because "only digital can sound so clean." He knows this for a fact because he read it in a magazine.
If I were a dishonest person, I could have made a fortune marketing this stuff.
If you read Mark Waldrep at his blog where he describes what happened at the show than you can't miss this line from him. "I found it curious that the presenter had to kneel down in front of the rig each time after the cables had been switched." Is it that hard to find the power switch? Or might he be adjusting the volume control.
I'm not a fan of snake oil salesman either so I think he was right calling him out on this. Over at the AK board this discussion has been going on for a bit as well.
I contacted Bob Levi and pointed him to the thread. He replied to me and asked me to post it. It's post number 57 under General Audio Discussion entitled "Interesting article on cables.....drama ensues..." I'm guessing that Bob is feeling that he should have left this whole thing alone. Now there is lots of publicity but of the wrong kind. It would be easy for the manufacture of the cable to put this to rest once and for all. A simple A/B test done scientifically by a few folks with nothing to gain would tell all. I'm not holding my breath.......
BillWojo
I'm not a fan of snake oil salesman either so I think he was right calling him out on this. Over at the AK board this discussion has been going on for a bit as well.
I contacted Bob Levi and pointed him to the thread. He replied to me and asked me to post it. It's post number 57 under General Audio Discussion entitled "Interesting article on cables.....drama ensues..." I'm guessing that Bob is feeling that he should have left this whole thing alone. Now there is lots of publicity but of the wrong kind. It would be easy for the manufacture of the cable to put this to rest once and for all. A simple A/B test done scientifically by a few folks with nothing to gain would tell all. I'm not holding my breath.......
BillWojo
Actually no. It's rather hard, time consuming, and expensive to set up a controlled scientific experiment. If there is an effect of the power cable, it will likely be a small one or we'd all use fancy power cables. To achieve statistical significance with a small effect size, you need a large sample size. So you might end up having to have 200ish participants in your listening trial. These participants will all need to be compensated for their time, invited into the test facility, go through the experiment, etc. This is cumbersome and expensive.
The good news is that once we have all the participants' preferences (A or B), running the statistical analysis takes only a few seconds. We'll then know if there was a clear preference for A or B ... or not.
Of course then the bickering starts. After all, this is just one experiment run on a very small sample of the 7B population of the Earth. Clearly we need to run more experiments like this to be able to say anything that approaches definitive. Maybe there was a flaw in the experiment protocol. Maybe...
The cable manufacturer has absolutely zero incentive to set up this experiment. They'd be far better off putting the $k needed to run the experiment towards their marketing budget. "Our Super-Wissbang Cable is so amazing even SCIENTISTS can't figure out how it works!! Buy it now!!"
Tom
But the response was supposedly draw-dropping (excepting the guys who looked at levels). The exact same demo, but with volume levels not moved in between, could be done and jaw positions inspected. No, not proof, but proof isn't being looked for - just a demo done on a level playing field for the listeners. They still might listen with their eyes, expectations, prior reading, etc. but at least the audio only part wouldn't be slanted by any volume control foolishness. But, yeah, the vendor doesn't have any incentive to do that -- unless the product might do as professed to.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.