Paul, on the whole I agree with everything you're saying above.

I do think it's healthy that some of the more dubious claims made by hifi retailers are challenged, however, so that prospective buyers have the opportunity of reading a bit of "cynicism" from us sceptical types as well.

In my opinion, a lot of stuff is bought (and not returned to the shop) due to either 1) the placebo effect or 2) the "emperor's new clothes" effect.

You go and buy some cables from xyz after reading some promotional stuff that assures you that "scientific tests" have demonstrated that they will bring such-and-such a benefit to your system. So you take them home and get everything connected up.

Maybe you notice an improvement. I would suggest this could merely be a placebo effect. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. Certainly there's a good argument to say that even if it is - so what? If the listener experiences an improvement, that's great. It doesn't necessarily matter how or why.

But maybe you don't hear any diifference. This seems concerning given the manufacturer's claims. Perhaps there's something wrong with your system or with your ears. Mildly embarrassed by your shortcomings you try to forget about the fifty quid that just went down the drain.

But if at some point during this process you read something challenging those retailer's claims, then maybe you can stop worrying about why you can't hear the difference that "everyone else" can, take the cables back to the shop, ask for your money back and spend it on buying some music instead.

I've got no big argument with someone who says "try these cables - me and my mates reckon they sound great" (although I might disagree with them).

It's the "buy these cables - exhaustive testing in our quantum probability laboratory has demonstrated superior elctron crystal grain energies" type stuff that irritates me because essentially, it's trying to part people with their cash on false pretences.

The scientific tradition is all about basing decisions upon rigorously tested evidence. This is what gives it its respectibility and why "science" is attractive to advertisers.

It's the hi-jacking of science (via sciencey-sounding phrases and unsupported claims) that really has to be challenged. If no-one does this, then proper science becomes diluted and loses its value.

The phrase "open mind" has been mentioned a few times during this discussion ... I would suggest that an open mind is all about not rejecting ideas without considering them first. It's not incompatible with the principle of rejecting ideas if they don't stand up to scrutiny. 

Incidentally, it's interesting to note that there does, in the end, seem to be a rational explanation as to why those chord cables may sound different one way round ... it's to do with what the shield is connected to rather than the "direction" of the conductors. A good example of the value of excluding external influences before coming to conclusions.