Cable directionality & cables

Changing leads altogether is a completely separate issue from directionality.

Can anyone come up with an example of directionality outside of hi-fi/AV geekery?

I think that if they can get us to swallow directionality, they can sell us anything. It is The Emperor's New Clothes, nothing more.

 

James

There is only so much cleaning that can take place. I said I did this repeatedly and was able every time to hear the differences.

By initial qualification I was an Electronics Engineer. Later qualification was in Educational Psychology. I am thus confident enough to state that I understand basic electronics and electrical theory, and I do understand a little about perception. I can also assure you that I am not on any drugs or alcohol and that my state of mind is considered to be healthy.

My four years of university education in electronics would tend to make me look for theoretical answers but I cannot explain the differences and I no longer try. There is much we don't know!.

Some may suggest that we should try to mathematically model cables using RLC lumped modelling techniques or any other methodology to try to explain differences or prove that there are none. Such techniques produce mathematical representations which may be suitable for some purposes but perhaps not all. In addition, and in terms of HiFi cables, these techniques will not of course incorporate components in the model for all the other elements in the 'equation' such as room, different equipment parameters, supports, stray electromagnetic fields, static, mechanical vibrations, and the individual's 'input system' and 'perception mechanism'. 'Cloth ears' are of course not good transducers. Remember the electrical energy does not exist in the 'wire'.

Any number of scientific studies can be designed to measure parameters or differences which are identifiable and measurable. The end result can then be an objective statement within the boundaries of the experiment. Such experimentation is however not always possible as the key issues are not understood. I think you are looking for 'absolutes' with imperfect knowledge and understanding.

Before you would accept any differences between cables I suspect that you would would wish 'objective scientific evidence' in relation to cable differences. But this does not exist and you are not willing to trust your own subjectivity. You haven't even tried it!!!!

Terry

 

Thanks for the link. However, some one from here should go and spice it up a bit first. Is it so boring. Where is the passion, heat, agast?

If you would so kindly allows me to ask you a question. For the sake of scientific curiosity, if this cable of yours seems to have a 'directionality' and it is not due to shielding and you notice this audible differences with a single blind comparison I for one would be keen to hear more about your finding. Since some has suggested I could appear a bit 'arrogant' when asking too many question like this, I am not saying you are lying or delusional. I think it is only natural when you share something we are allowed at less ask for little bit of detail of the circumstances of your listening tests. Hope I have not come across as impolite and cynical.

 

Arh woofie, seeing as your back on this again would you mind answering my questions I posed yesterday?, I wondered as you place so much emphesis on dbt, I'm sure a lot of the forum members would be entranced, as to how you apply this technique to your own kit selection.
Can you also share your, system configuration with us, and why you came to select the equipment in the first instane.
I'll just repost my questions again to refresh you.

"Now back to some of my previous questions, your selection of equipment, where did you double blid test it?, was it a retailer ? I'm sure the foum would like to know where they can pursue this in the high street, how much kit did you abx against?, was it one box at a time?, had you already choosen a cdp, and then took it along and dbt's the amps/ speakers
would you do this every time you wanted to change kit?
Did you do the same for the cables ?, do you actively discourage home listening demos (non dbt)?"

Thanks for sharing your insights with us

 

Terry, for an educated man, you have a massive talent for self-deception. I bet you couldn't hear any difference blind, for there is none.

P.S. Humour me, I need a good laugh. What are the differences? On the Naim forum, the wise elders decree that the Masters at Naim have verily ****ed-up: the forum elders think that the new Burndy sounds best the wrong way round. What say you, o Terry?

 

For the record if you look back my previous posting I believe I only challenge the belief that interconnects and speakers cables sound very different.

When I bought my friend Linn system (Karik, Kairn, LK100) about 10 years ago (is that a highend enough system with enough resolving power for you guys?) I spend the next few months auditioning speaker cables to replace my very cheap Cabletalk maybe £1/m stuff since I was lead to believe by all magazines they could be improved. Since I was a believer back them got 3 types of Audioquest priced about £7/m, £15/m and £30/m for home demo. Unfortunately my ears think they sound the same. Certainly not when a 3m pair will cost £310 when terminated with audiophile plugs. Borrowed friends Kimbles 8TC. Still sounds just as 'bad' or nil audible differences. The story goes on for a few months. Then walk in a highend shop in Glasgow. Salesman was very convincing. After 30 minutes of lecture bought £200 pair of new toy call Ecosse Reference. At home swap it in my system. Hallujah! Finally everything sounds seems so much better. Never really compare back since the difference seems so much obviously superior and developing a bit of a testing fatigue to say the least. During the next few months magazines give this new cable many stars rating. Maybe these goldenears just have better ears.

Next bought Ecosse interconnect. Compare it with the Linn analogue interconnects. To my ears they sound identical. Maybe my ears not blessed enough. By then replace the system with Tag McLaren AV32R bp192 and DVD32R. Bought and borrow a few more interconnects. They all still sound identical.

Then one glorious day had a discussion in another forum. An old wise audiophile suggests that maybe one should compare stuff using blind testing.

First to try is the previously old Cabletalk with the superior Ecosse Reference. With SBT they are identical. Got some friends to compare interconnects next. Connect 2 different interconnects via a single CDP with 2 outputs to the back of a Tag AV processor. One person in charge of switching the inputs of the processor with the remote. With single blind listening like this they are identical to us.

Further reading in audio magazines and the Internet, so far it seems all the recorded audible differences between cables are NOT conducted with SBT or DBT. Therefore it seems there is a serious lack of credible proof for all these audiophile toys. I guess you notice I have asking esteem members here and in one other forum if they have recorded differences between cables during blind listening tests.

It was never on my part to cast doubt in your experiences. It is an honest desire to seeks clarification and has a sensible debate. I think some members could never discuss a emotional subject like this with cool head to notice what other people are trying to ask. I admit afterwhile I might have join in the teasing game since everyone seems to loose their head destroying any further sensible debate. I think people have come down a bit due to Michael's and some others peaceful road map.

To be honest I would be more interested to know if any professional manufactures have conducted listening tests based on some form of DBT since they are more likely to have the means and capability to design one of any scientific value.

My latest project is to compare the new Tag DVD transport with my 10 years old Linn CDP. First round SBT to my ears it is very frighteningly similar. Hopefully after a few more months of listening I will repeat the test again. That is why I have not sold the Karik yet.

 

I found that a very interesting and thoughtful post. Thanks Wolfie. As a punishment, here's a longish posting of my own. I'll try to answer your question above, as it applies to my company.

As a manufacturer of speakers, I confess that I haven't yet conducted any DB tests. I have run a number of single blind tests for various A/B comparisons.

Sometimes when I make a change, the results are stunningly obvious to me (I design for myself). If option 'B' seems clearly better than 'A', I'll live with 'B'. After some days, I may continue with 'B' or, if further listening has shown up details that I hadn't originally picked up. I may compare it again with 'A' to see if my conclusions remain the same.

If I make a change and the differences are not quickly apparent, I may discard the change or, if I hear that there's something there but it's subtle, I'll make a blind test. Often that would be carried out with my wife and usually we would swap roles as listener and tester.

The listener is blind to the changes; the tester isn't. It's possible that the tester can convey something unintentionally by the listener's subconscious picking up of signals below the threshold of conscious awareness. Perhaps telepathy plays a role. Either way, this is about as controversial as directional cables. If the difference I'm testing is as subtle as the subconscious pick-up between tester and listener, I probably won't bother with it anyway.

Most of my real learning takes place over several days of listening.

There are exceptions to the above.

Setting up the speakers in a 'new' room (eg. at someone's home) involves positioning the full-range speakers, positioning the subs and experimenting with the floor/speaker interfaces.

Setting up the speakers for an exhibition involves all of the above plus playing with equipment, supports and cables.

In someone's home I will do the obvious stuff and arrive at a consensus with the other parties for the more subtle details. There may also be the occasional, impromptu blind test (as you do). Generally, at an initial listening, one doesn't achieve the level of detail that can be achieved while living with the system for a while.

For exhibition set-ups, I'm often setting up in the company of other professionals. For example, at the Heathrow show we will have the top man from Michell, the boys from Voodoo Isolation, Graham of Trichord (who will doubtless turn up at some point during the show), Tone (w-m) and me. Gary of Border Patrol will be away this time; otherwise he would join us.

We each tend to do our own thing with our own pieces of equipment and then do the positioning, equipment integration and tuning. Generally we will work by group consensus, although I tend to give my own views more weight - well I'm paying for the room and it's got the name of my company on the door.

Even during an exhibition there are often a number of blind 'mini tests' that take place. Suffice it to say that near the end of the show we would expect to achieve our best sound.

Of course all of this is independent of the objective tests that come from measurement. Measurements can throw up resonances, overhangs and frequency anomalies. These can then be addressed and the speakers then retested. Most equipemnt companies use meaurement and mine is no exception here. Subjectively, I generally find that a measured anomaly should be 'under addressed' rather than 'over addressed'.

The design process itself goes beyond objectivity, measurement and calculation and into the realms of imagination, feeling and intuition. Any hi-fi designer who has not developed these aspects of himself will turn out, at best, pretty, formulaic boxes. He's unlikely to be making music.

 

:jig: :buddies: :SWMBO: :spank: :buddies:

 

Harman (JBL, Revel, Infinity) have a double blind test setup for testing speakers and some of the best minds in the business (Floyd Toole and Sean Olive).

Dolby Labs run extensive blind tests too (the work of Benjamin and Gannon).

Lipschitz at Waterloo (although he's independent and not a "manufacturer").

etc.. in fact just about anyone wanting to publish a peer reviewed paper in the IEEE or AES journals will have done such a test..

 

Dat,

Just to let you know,Harman's chief engineer, Greg Timbers (of some 30 years standing and responsible for most of the top JBL monitors over that period as well as the K2 and Everest project), does not use this blind stuff.

I know this because we have spoken at length person to person.

 

Does that makes his products more or less creditable then?

The focus of debate is audiophile-cables. Have there been any attempt by manufacturers to let amatuers or professional reviewers to test these products during R&D or later?

 

Option 3

It makes his products no more, or no less creditable.


:MILD:

 

Spot on Chris, I was about to say the same thing myself

 

To you maybe but not for sceptics. It is about the level of certainty. Ask the scientists or physicians here what that means if you are not sure. It is up to you whether you like their products personally.

However, even to my cloth-ears loudspeakers between manufacturers do have easily recognised audible differences. With or without SBT. In fact I find even some manufacturer own centre speaker sounds different to their floor standing or bookshelf speakers at home, right from the first few minutes of side by side comparison. They are confirm by my simply SBT.

I am only asking whether audiophile-cables have been reliably tested. It is about looking at the subject objectively.

 

Wolfgang,

I was only correcting Dat's erroneous post.

I have absolutely no interest in your on going debate and pontification.

 

Woofie,
Again we agree outstanding.

Again to a degree I agree, Loudspeakers being one of the more easier components to sort (by easily definable defferenices) it may take longer to find you like though!!!!
Maunfactor centre speakers tend to voiced for a particular 'range of speakers' and you may find they do 2,3 or more centre speakers to match their various ranges, and each unit is voiced to match that particular 'set'.

I'm sure a few companies do spend a fair amount of R+D, however in the same vein an awful lot spent a disportionate amount on advertising and marketing, although their share holders may quite like a return on their investment (prehaps!)
As for telling differenices between cdp's/cables/amp, the definintion of *BIG* or *SIGNIFICANT* will be debated into enterity.

 

I think most of us would settle for "demonstrable" rather than "significant" at the moment.

wolfgang, the famous challenge to win £1000 by differentiating two analogue cables under blind conditions is still open AFAIK - noone's ever managed it. So no, there hasn't been a study comparing audiophile cables blind.

 

It's actually more specific than that. It is whether turning the same cable around makes any difference, a concept which any sane person would just laugh at.

 

Seems we have at least found some common ground.

7_V ,
Last night I had a look at your website. Your speakers look very nice. Unfortunately, I have never had a chance to listen to them yet. Maybe one day.

Bottleneck,
I am trying to reply to your post early before Merlin cut in.

 

ITs an interesting point this, I think.

At a trip to WM's I heard (in his system) their new reference interconnect vs the old reference liberator.

There was a clear and noticeable difference in character to both Julian2002 and myself (and timpy and WM of course).

It would be interesting to see if the difference was as noticeable in other systems... and to compare them with other manufacturers cables (the best available).. this is something I havent done yet.

I would be more confident of hearing a difference between these 2 cables, than I would between Robbos old DPA amp and Timpys Arcam Alpha (5?) - which sounded exactly the same to me.

Anyway, what Im trying to say in a roundabout way is that the sonic character of interconnects can be noticeable in some circumstances, and component changes cannot.

Whether A is better than B in a certain situation, or worth the outlay is a matter of opinion, and obviously system specific. This applies to components and cables IMO.

The point Im trying to make in a roundabout way is that Id like to see Marantz and Denon for example DBT a difference between two amps of similar value... would they be volunteering for the 1,000 challenge?


Chris