Can We Hear Differences Between AC Power Cords?

but only 'cos you know that you were using cardas. but is the psycological component of 'the cable' a valid one? i say yes as it modulates what you hear in the real world. the objectivists say no. imho it's that simple. gotta go bsg is getting interesting.

cheers


julian

 

Ah, but which one sounded better

 

It's pretty elementary statistics. I could bore everyone with the details but I won't since you're clearly just on a wind up . Suffice it to say that the results of the HF+ test were a very long way from being statistically significant and the results of this test are.

If you believe that to be the case, fair enough.

Quite. Much, much, much smaller. Zero infact .

Michael.

 

Well, I'd have no argument with that at all. If subjectivists accept that all an expensive cable is doing is psychologically modulating the way they hear their system that's fine. It would suggest that appropriate therapy could enable them to maintain their listening enjoyment at vast cost savings though

Michael.

 

Oh no go on Michael do

I'm pretty sure a similar sample size was taken on the Stereophile test that you claimed was statistically insignificant so maybe some explanation as to the rules is in order so we all can play

I don't beleive it to be the case, I know it to be so, after all I heard it

But of course I'm happy to accept that the £100 UberDac sounds better than anything else on the planet - after all, you have tested it - haven't you?

 

Welcome to the Jungle

 

yup you definately got your pseudonym correct.

 

Interesting article ............. :rds2: ........ but






those magazines from the top shelf............ have a lot more measurements that no one knows what they means, and those girls phrooowws... especially with blind folds and all tie up with lots of exotic cables. :crazy: Thanks for the tips Penance.

 

Oh class :ffrc:

It never crossed your mind that the cable that sounded significantly better and more open was the freebie because your preconceptions prevented you doing so.

In much the same way as your preconceptions of the differences cables can make prevent you from realising that they do

 

Glad to be a help

 

merlin, I'm not sure what Stereophile test you're referring to. I haven't mentioned any Stereophile test, I've just referred to the HF+ test and the one that started this thread.

It sounds better than the digital sources I have compared it against (apart from Ian's 47 Labs which, not surprisingly, sounded the same) so "better than anything else on the planet" would be something of an overstatement.

In what way do you think I should have tested my DAC? You seem to think that just because someone thinks that a blind ABX test is the only valid way to show whether differences exist implies that they must use such a test whenever they choose any bit of kit. That's just nonsense. As it happens though I know from Stereophile measurements that my DAC does measure differently to the majority of digital sources out there (assuming my DAC measures similarly to the 47 Labs DAC which I think is a fair assumption). That would indicate it will also sound different. The preference is up to the individual.

Michael.

 

Which cable you thought sounded better is irrelevant to what I posted. I didn't assume anything or have any preconceptions, it was Julian who assumed the Cardas sounded better, not me.

You're not going to get away with putting words into my mouth mate .

Michael.

 

Michael,

I think the sentiment is fairly obvious to non partisan parties

I was simply offering a precis of your response - if you can get out of that you should replace the "lab" part with "son"

 

merlin, I was talking in the general case, not specifically to your example. In general, audiophiles tend to prefer more expensive cables. If that weren't the case then there wouldn't be a cable debate, everyone would just have the freebies.

Now are you saying that you genuinely thought the freebie IC was better than your beloved Cardas or are you, as I suspect, just bullshitting so you can twist your argument?

Michael.

 

Michaeson?



Or should we leave the l in

 

Why do you think that is Mike if there is no difference?

 

Michael,

you are missing the point as usual

The fact is there was a difference. If that difference was due to the distorted perception of reality brought on by marketing and reviews, the result would have been different.

Your assumptions give you away and make your blind testing yourself a complete waste of time

 

Any chance of volume discount?

 

Too late dev, i've already pay palled him