Do cables make a difference ?

[michaelab]

The bumble bee thing.....The areodynamics research that said it couldn't fly....now proved to have been in error. saw it on something like horizon a few years back.

Bullshit. Did you even read the link I posted earlier? As Paul has pointed out the "aerodynamic research" showed that bumble bees can't glide. They can't. The research was correct. Nothing has changed and nothing has "proved to have been in error"

Michael.

 

[zanash]

Glide ?.....just remind me again what this thread is about?

 

[Active Hiatus]

Perhaps the pertinent phrase in Michael's story is

. Of course, he found that there was insufficient lift and went off to find out the correct answer.

People do hear a difference between cables. Surely it's science's job to find out what is going on, rather than to dismiss it out of hand? But until you lot decide exactly what you're all arguing about that isn't going to happen

 

[michaelab]

Surely it's science's job to find out what is going on

But with cables, nothing is going on so there's nothing to find out about. With bumble bees clear to anyone that they could fly so it was interesting to find out how.

Michael.

 

[Active Hiatus]

But there is a suffiecient evidence from people who say there is something going on, so to deny that is not good science. Something is going on, but what? Science doesn't know all the answers, that's why we have scientists, to find out that which we do not know. Just to say "nothing is going on" is lazy and blatantly untrue. It may be that certain physical atributes preclude certain outcomes but then we need to know what other variables are influencing the outcome. All we've had from the "scientists" on this board is "It's not happening" but no one has explained why it can't nor explained what is causing the differences that are heard.

FWIW I am sceptical about cables and think they are much of a muchness but I do think important that the discussion is based on fact rather than assumption and perception, which is largely what has been presented up till now

 

[notaclue]

Active Hiatus, we have explanations as to why people hear differences - expectation bias, lunacy etc. etc.

What we don't have is any proof offered by those claiming differences that those differences really exist. Proof requires somebody to pass a double blind test. Shouldn't be difficult considering some of the claims of huge/'night and day' differences. Yet still nobody has ever done so, as far as I know.

Let's face it. [Electrically similar] Cables in all probability sound the same and people just imagine differences. This is the most likely explanation.

This should all be obvious to anyone who is sensible.

 

[Anex]

What we don't have is any proof offered by those claiming differences that those differences really exist. Proof requires somebody to pass a double blind test. Shouldn't be difficult considering some of the claims of huge/'night and day' differences. Yet still nobody has ever done so, as far as I know.

If you need the proof so badly you set one up.
There seems to be alot of DIY tube guys, who've spent time changing individual components and circuit topologies that like cables, theres no debating it at WAD for example. You can't say people DIYing stuff as cheap as possible are upset about spending a load of money etc. etc. Just an observation, I'm going back to soldering my phono stage again now.

 

[Active Hiatus]

What we don't have is any proof offered by those claiming differences that those differences really exist.

The differences do "exist" or else there wouldn't be claims to hear them or people making the different cables. What hasn't been explained is what those differences are, what causes them and to what extent they are products of imagination. I agree some testing needs to be done. Without that any discussion is mere speculation.

Let's face it. [Electrically similar] Cables in all probability sound the same and people just imagine differences. This is the most likely explanation.

I agree that it is likely but it is conjecture. Again the statement "all cables sound the same" is pretty widesweeping. Are all cables the same? and do all cable designs show similar test results? are questions that need answering.

This should all be obvious to anyone who is sensible.

If you look out of the window you'll see the sun setting. It is obvious that the Sun goes round the Earth. Except of course we know better because more careful observations have been made. What would happen if science had said "It's obvious the sun goes round the Earth so we don't need to challenge this"? Statements like "it's obvious" and "It don't believe it's true, so why bother" are lazy cop outs.

Science needs to challenge or it becomes mere dogma

 

[3DSonics]

Hi,

Again the statement "all cables sound the same" is pretty widesweeping.

More precisely, it is a statement of religious faith.

In certain circles it seem people have taken to a religious militant audio objectivism which leads them to an evangelical style intolerance with "heretics" all cloaked in pseudo science.

Just consider them together with televangelists and others of such ilk.

Ciao T

 

[notaclue]

And where has anybody made the statement "all cables sound the same"?

For the last time, there is no proof that electrically similar cables sound different. Therefore, we must doubt the claim that people can hear real (not imagined) differences between electrically simialr cables until somebody is able to offer some proof in the form of passing a double blind test.

 

[3DSonics]

Hi,

For the last time, there is no proof that electrically similar cables sound different.

Excatly when are two cables no longer electrically similar to fulfill the requirement of the thesis you propose.

Without clear indications what is "electrically similar" or not the whole statement is meaning- and content-less, unless you are just saying "all cables sound the same" in a different way.

Ciao T

 

[michaelab]

If you look out of the window you'll see the sun setting. It is obvious that the Sun goes round the Earth. Except of course we know better because more careful observations have been made. What would happen if science had said "It's obvious the sun goes round the Earth so we don't need to challenge this"? Statements like "it's obvious" and "It don't believe it's true, so why bother" are lazy cop outs.

Again this is a false analogy. "the sun goes around the earth" seemed a valid theory that fitted the available evidence. This theory started to be challenged in the light of new evidence and attempts to explain the wider solar system.

As far as cables sounding different there is NO EVIDENCE that this is an actual phenonmenon and therefore there's nothing to investigate.

If people were able to reliably distinguish hifi cables in an ABX test that would be evidence. Despite probably thousands of attempts no reliable evidence of cable differences is forthcoming. We can't just go on what a few or even many people say that they experience as valid evidence otherwise we'd be investigating all sorts of absurd things such as alien abductions (which many people profoundly believe they have experienced).

Michael.

 

[Active Hiatus]

And where has anybody made the statement "all cables sound the same"?

That seems to be the thrust of the anti cable brigade although I am quite prepared to be corrected.

For the last time, there is no proof that electrically similar cables sound different. Therefore, we must doubt the claim that people can hear real (not imagined) differences between electrically simialr cables

So you've made up your mind already with out any investigation although I notice you have narrowed the parameters a little

until somebody is able to offer some proof in the form of passing a double blind test.

which is based on perception so, unless you have a large test group (over 500 people), it will not give a meaningful result. People's senses are notroriously bad at interpreting what they see/hear/etc. Just because the test subjects all hear the same test sound doesn't mean they will perceive it consistently. This is a bigger draw back with ABX tests. I would prefer something less ambiguous.

And before you think I'm trying to defend the pro-cable lobby, let me repeat I am dubious as to the merits of aftermarket cables. I just feel it is important that the arguments are countered by fact rather than gut instinct or dogma.

And while we are on the subject, no one has as yet said whether there are differences between various cables. I look at the catalogues and see a range of products at differing prices. Are these all the same basic design? Do the differing materials have an impact? Do the differing configurations?

 

[Active Hiatus]

If people were able to reliably distinguish hifi cables in an ABX test that would be evidence. Despite probably thousands of attempts no reliable evidence of cable differences is forthcoming.

So at last someone has some evidence to disprove what the pro cable people are saying. Can you give a link to these tests. As I've said earlier I have grave doubts about the validity of ABX when it comes to perceived experience but if the test group is that large it may well work.

We can't just go on what a few or even many people say that they experience as valid evidence otherwise we'd be investigating all sorts of absurd things such as alien abductions (which many people profoundly believe they have experienced).

So basically you have made up your mind and you are right and everyone else is wrong? Some might call that as blinkered as the "I can hear a difference so it must be true" brigade.

 

[notaclue]

which is based on perception so, unless you have a large test group (over 500 people), it will not give a meaningful result.

Why do you need over 500 people? Just one will do.

Look. I am going to say it impossible for somebody to run 100 metres in under 10 seconds. Should we get 500 people to try it? And decide whether it is possible based on those 500 people? That would be daft.

Far better to test one person who claims they CAN run 100 metres in under 10 seconds. So long as one person can do so then we have proof that it is possible to run 100 metres in under 10 seconds.

Ditto with cables. We just need one person to demonstrate they can hear differences.

Nobody is disputing that people hear differences. The dispute is whether the differences are real or imagined.

If somebody feels they can hear differences between cables why not contact Stewart Pinkerton at Google audio groups? He will give you £1,000 if you pass a double blind cable test. I believe you need 17 or more correct identifications out of 20 trials. The cables must match within 0.1db from 20hz to 20khz. Obviosuly, it is assumed that the cables are level matched. I am not sure about RFI/EMI etc. I think that just level and frequency response are specified for matching.

 

[garyi]

Science can't challenge belief.

Belief is just that, what people believe. Such as faith, the belief in something one can't see.

How can science disprove or prove god? It cannot because regardless of fact people have faith, people believe.

Lesser scale but the same for Cables. There is no reasonable argument for why speaker cable has to go in a certain direction, however people have faith in their chosen manufacturer and believe that its true.

Science can't help there.

 

[Active Hiatus]

People keep spouting that it is unscientific for cables to sound different. When asked to give an imperical answer as to why the only answer given is "That they know" or "They believe" or "Why should they igive proof because it's obvious nonsense" As yet, no one has actually disproved the pro-cable lot are wrong or even. This comes across as blinkered dogmatic belief in just the same way as the "I hear, therefore it's true" brigade.

As I've said before I'm sceptical about cables but if people are going to argue about it for 8 pages etc they should offer more than beliefs, which ever side of the argument they are on. It should be easy for the science based group to win this argument. They claim to have facts to back their argument while the pro-cable lobby only have experience. Unfortuantely getting the facts is like getting blood from a stone. No one seems to want to supply them.

 

[Saab]

What a load of gobblygook.I've tried silver cables and then copper with my current gear,and even my deaf and extremely senile grandma could hear a difference with her Max Bygraves cd.Stop dribbling on about science and bumble bees,they have nothing to do with my grandmas ears.Odyssey 4 versus OED Silver thing thingy? no pissing contest,science required my arse.

 

[notaclue]

...even my deaf and extremely senile grandma could hear a difference with her Max Bygraves cd.Stop dribbling on about science and bumble bees...

"Stop dribbling on about science and bumble bees" is one of Max's best albums. A really great album.

 

[notaclue]

People keep spouting that it is unscientific for cables to sound different. When asked to give an imperical answer as to why the only answer given is "That they know" or "They believe" or "Why should they igive proof because it's obvious nonsense"

Who has said that? Not me. I would never say anything like that. Never.

The point is that it is unscientific for cables to sound different. Why? Because I know. You want proof? Why should I give proof because it's obvious nonsense.