End of cable debate - snake oil

JCL said:
Or,


I think it would be far more likely that a lack of electronic understanding would lead to the person imagining audible cable differences than someone with an understanding of the interaction between electronics and sound.
Click to expand...

So you are saying that someone with electronic knowledge and a preconception is less likely to be biased than a person who has no knowledge and no preconception?
Hows that work? - Or are you suggesting electronic engineers are beyond bias?

Andy
 
NACA5cablescan.jpg


Paul,

In the example of two speaker cables above, would you say that these two cables were or were not electrically equivalent?
 
There isn't sufficient information provided. But 'probably'.

I don't understand why the resonant frequency is quoted since that is directly implied by the LC values, but the frequency response in the test system isn't provided. The former tells us nothing, the latter would allow a direct judgement of 'electrical equivalence'.

Paul
 
Paul Ranson said:
There isn't sufficient information provided. But 'probably'.
Click to expand...

They seem very different to me: the Hitachi has many more of those resistance and capacitance things and the Naim more Q-Factor, whatever the hell that may be. And as for leakage, whatever that is, one is practically incontinent compared to the other. Surely this is sufficient explanation for someone to be able to tell them apart in a test - they are different things?

Tony.
 
99.87% of men consider themselves to be a better than average driver.

Much can be gained from consideration of this observation that can be applied to the cable debate.
 
Surely this is sufficient explanation for someone to be able to tell them apart in a test - they are different things?
Click to expand...
It's easy to tell them apart with a meter, but if the frequency response variations caused by the cables are less than about 0.1dB then you are unlikely to be able to hear them.

The cable industry is built on the assumption that factors other than these are audible and that cables costing hundreds or thousands of pounds can be justified by their sound. Debating whether and how this can be the case is surely a valid waste of time on a forum?

I'm guessing that Murray is going to report that these cables could be distinguished in his blind test. In which case, assuming the FR deviations are negligible, he has a good prima facie claim on Randi's $1000000.

Paul
 
So, Murray, when did you stop beating your wife?

The question cannot be answered in those terms 'yes' or 'no'. What matters is the aberration introduced by the cable in the test system as a consequence of it's bulk electrical parameters. If the difference between the aberrations introduced by the cables is less than (say) 0.1dB then they are equivalent. The actual amounts of L C or R are irrelevant. In practice I guess that these two cables in an average system would be equivalent, they are both pretty normal, but you haven't provided enough information to be able to accurately answer the question for the test system.

We've been through this more than once on this thread.

Paul
 
why are all the anti - cable guys so pent up? try a thai massage guys - it may relieve the tension you feel for not being able to hear properly - or you could get a grommet for your ears! they do cheap ones in the news of the world mag
 
Banpe, you might want to edit that post or the moderator will be after you for name calling.

Anyway I'd be really interested in you demonstrating that you can hear properly. Why not choose two interconnects you find sound different and we'll run some trials?

Paul
 
what particular trials paul? if they involve measuring them with rulers or otherwise - ihave no interest - If the test is done with ears alone and you are as honest as I - I would gladly take a test, as I have stated omn here many times. In my opinion, measurements and tests are a complete waste of time if i am to hear differences - which is what hifi is all about - surely.....Ive seen all the measurement references and lcr stuff and it doesnt impress me in the slightest. in fact the reason that im bored of it, is truly that I dont understand a word of it! But to me, and this is personal to me only - I couldnt give a toss what a cable measures...im only interested in the sound / or lack of sound it provides. I buy hifi because I like the sound or synergy it provides. I have never bought anything because it looked nice, or measured well as to me this is a way of taking away my emotions from the music - which is why I started to buy hifi in the first place. Im a very honest guy and have owned expensive gear and then gone back to cheaper stuff, that i preferred. What i would find useful is a test between 2 cables where there are no tricks - someone could change them over for sure, and I would simply say if there was a difference, ( imo) If i got this right, more times than wrong, then i can hear - if not Im making it up...if they sound different then measurements are pointless to me ,,,the reason being that they actually do sound different and that is why I bought them. Any time after xmas, anywhere reasonably close to the west mids....my ears vs the anti cables science. bring it on!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Speaker cable A.
R 50% (milliohms) 24m.
R shunt (Megohms) >200M.
C shunt (pF) 1950p.
L loop (uH) <<1.0u.
1kHz dynamic error correction -68.5 dB.
10.5kHz dynamic error correction -104.5 dB.

Speaker cable B.
R 50% (milliohms) 255m.
R shunt (Megohms) 55M.
C shunt (pF) 134p.
L loop (uH) 7.5u.
1kHz dynamic error correction -49.5 dB.
10.5kHz dynamic error correction 84 dB.
 
ADPully said:
So you are saying that someone with electronic knowledge and a preconception is less likely to be biased than a person who has no knowledge and no preconception?
Hows that work? - Or are you suggesting electronic engineers are beyond bias?

Andy
Click to expand...

Andy,

I'm suggesting that there is no difference in sound. Someone with a technical understanding that there can't be any difference would surely be surprised if there was ? Someone who has no technical understanding will easily convince themselves that a difference exists even if there isn't one.

No ?
 
Paul Ranson said:
So, Murray, when did you stop beating your wife?

The question cannot be answered in those terms 'yes' or 'no'. What matters is the aberration introduced by the cable in the test system as a consequence of it's bulk electrical parameters. If the difference between the aberrations introduced by the cables is less than (say) 0.1dB then they are equivalent. The actual amounts of L C or R are irrelevant. In practice I guess that these two cables in an average system would be equivalent, they are both pretty normal, but you haven't provided enough information to be able to accurately answer the question for the test system.

We've been through this more than once on this thread.

Paul
Click to expand...

And with that weaselly & evasive answer, followers of this thread realised it was Game Over.

If electrical equivalence of two cables can't be established from their respective L,C and R then the proposition that two electrically equivalent cables sound alike is pretty worthless.

Yes, one piece of QED 79 strand cable might sound like another piece of QED 79 strand. Beyond that, it would seem, all bets are off.

My work here is done.
 


Write your reply...

Latest posts

Back
Top