Roy Gregory has lost the plot this time...

I would love to explore this, IIRC it was a Cyrus 8 amp he was using not a CDp. I run a Cyrus 7 amp with a PSX-R so I fit the bill nicely because I paid 350 for a PSX-R - if a 220 Shiva cable provided better results I would have saved 130 squids regardless that I didnt get a black box for the money.
 
Originally posted by greg
I would love to explore this, IIRC it was a Cyrus 8 amp he was using not a CDp. I run a Cyrus 7 amp with a PSX-R so I fit the bill nicely because I paid 350 for a PSX-R - if a 220 Shiva cable provided better results I would have saved 130 squids regardless that I didnt get a black box for the money.

Hi Greg,

Thanks for the correction. I think if you conducted this test and you proved RG to be correct, then one could ask whether it was time for audiophile power cords to be regarded as components in their own right (subject to further tests of course) such as CDPs & amps etc rather than just an after-thought.

Also, if say the Valhalla cord proves to be more effective than say Naim's XPS power supply or other such expensive power supplies out there, then what happens next?:D Ah, the joy of DBTs. :D



Enjoy the music,

Lawrie.:D
 
Re: Re: Re: Roy Gregory has lost the plot this time...

Originally posted by Lawrie
I always knew that you boys would one day see the light even with velvet balaclavas on.:D:D
Velvet? Mine's black latex :JOEL:

Greg: "I would be very interested to attend a DBT similar to the one RG performed."

RG didn't perform a DBT. I really think we should try and sort this out, maybe even get RG involved if possible. As I've already said twice, if the differences were as huge as he said they were then they'd be easily identifiable in a DBT.

I'd like it sorted out which ever way it goes. If it shows the cables do make a difference then there's some interesting science to be done and it will give the sceptics something to think about. OTOH if there's no DBT identifiable difference then we'd have to conclude, at the very least, that the differences are extremely subtle or probably non-existent - certainly nothing like the "night & day" effect RG talked about.

Michael.
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Roy Gregory has lost the plot this time...

Originally posted by michaelab
RG didn't perform a DBT....

True, I meant a DBT which used a similar range of equipment to RG (ie. for my own selfish reasons might include a Cyrus amp for example ;))

I would really like to hear comparisons of...
1. Nordost (Shiva/Vishnu/Valhalla)
2. two or three Shunyatas (and ideally a Hydra)
3. a TNT TTS
4. Eupens

Lets ave it!
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Roy Gregory has lost the plot this time...

RG didn't perform a DBT. I really think we should try and sort this out, maybe even get RG involved if possible.

He'd never do it, he has far too much to lose. He may be daft, but he isn't daft, if you know what I mean.

Hi-Fi+ seems to have turned into the Nordost fan club over the last couple of years. It's advertising-related, no question about it. That's the way magazines work, and anybody who doubts that is a tad naive.

FWIW I had the Nordost cable experience at Bristol, from a stock cable up through the various snake oil options, to the top Valhalla. Any changes I heard (which I doubt I could distinguish blind, tbh) were subtle, and in the "different rather than better" category. In fact, they were so subtle, the difference was most likely in my head.

It's all guff, really.

-- Ian
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Originally posted by LiloLee
Wine tasters take one sip and then rinse with plain water to try and bring the palatte back to the same starting place.
This is standard procedure in sensory beverage tasting. It should be noted that *serious* wine/tea/coffee tasting (ie not done for a TV audience) is done blind.
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Roy Gregory has lost the plot this time...

Originally posted by greg
True, I meant a DBT which used a similar range of equipment to RG (ie. for my own selfish reasons might include a Cyrus amp for example ;))

I would really like to hear comparisons of...
1. Nordost (Shiva/Vishnu/Valhalla)
2. two or three Shunyatas (and ideally a Hydra)
3. a TNT TTS
4. Eupens

Lets ave it!

Well I've been watching and smiling here, some very valid points being raised too. Especially about marketing and price plus the enternal does it, doesn't it.
Ok, we have a Valhalla/vishnu (not heard the shiva), an Anaconda, Tiapan, cardas golden ref, Acoustic Zen tsunamia/Kratoa, Elrod sig, Eupens, and a few more
Power condtoners Hydra/Fururtec/Trichord/Audio magic in various guises.
Regularly we listen to these chords, with/without power conditoners, for our own selfish/ruthless/world dominating ends
I'll state now, we haven't done much DBT other than guess which cable is playing today ?, however if you guys can agree a format/ level matched/same kit/same disc etc, we may just bring some of this gear out to play.
All I can say is, the differencies (Audiable) between some of these cables isn't subtle, others well that reaises the odd smile.
I agree with stebbo on the £1750 for a power chord is plain obsence (however please note, more than a few are sold, weather they believe what they read, or their ears I can't say, however they are sold, also the Anacondona is £2k, the Gargantuana is £1500)
Bottom line is would they/could they offer anything more than say a £12 kettle lead ?
Maybe you guys should assemble a crack DBT squad to suss out the kack, (really) Wm

Edited to add,
We also try all the stock leads that come with the equipment were testing with, and even changed the connectors for the more approved ones and use the stock leads with the conditioners also.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Roy Gregory has lost the plot this time...

Originally posted by wadia-miester


I'll state now, we haven't done much DBT other than guess which cable is playing today ?, however if you guys can agree a format/ level matched/same kit/same disc etc, we may just bring some of this gear out to play.
All I can say is, the differencies (Audiable) between some of these cables isn't subtle, others well that reaises the odd smile.

Now this sounds to me like the makings of Myth Busting Day Mk II and hats off to a cable manufacturer for laying down the gauntlet. Now, replicating RG's Cyrus system should not be that difficult should it? Also, borrowing the Nordost power cord range should not be that difficult either. Even Michealab is up for the challenge so, I just hope that this time some real myths such as Nordost power cords do improve the sound of components would be busted (or not:D)

Originally posted by wadia-miester

Anyway back to the plot, has anyone mailed RG and asked him why he wrote such 'Interesting prose'

Good point there WM as double standards should not be seen to operating on these forums.;) Reviewers like Roy Gregory should be given the right to reply as it appears that his reputation is being questioned to a certain degree wouldn't you say?;)




Enjoy the music,

Lawrie.:D
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Originally posted by Lawrie
Good point there WM as double standards should not be seen to operating on these forums.;) Reviewers like Roy Gregory should be given the right to reply as it appears that his reputation is being questioned to a certain degree wouldn't you say?;)
Judging by his response to a different letter in Issue 29 he's a self confessed luddite and probably doesn't have an e-mail account, much less access to the "inter-web" (his words) thingamy-bobby :D

Michael.
 
We need a comfortable venue.
We need a system that is absolutely good, this probably means that lucky dip in Timpy's speaker closet isn't the best approach.
We need a statistician to tell us how many listeners, how many trials and how many 'got it right' would be significant.
We need an approach to the listening that fits in with the listeners and maximises the chances of success.

If the setup were two 'identical' CDPs into an amp/speakers. The first round of tests is with identical mains cables. This should show identity if we have the levels etc right. The second is with a wanky wire. This should show a difference.

The tests could be 'ABX', an excerpt of 'A', followed by 'B' followed by a randomly chosen A or B. Repeat until bored.

It would be very useful to use a computer to control the CDPs and preamp/switcher. Does anybody know of an IR interface that does RC5?

Paul
 
Originally posted by Paul Ranson

We need a system that is absolutely good

Good Lord, don't we all :D

Moving briefly back to the subject of peer review: don't forget that it operates at the point of manuscript submission. If you have results demonstrating such-and-such an unexpected effect then that can't really be argued with - it's only if your methodology is flawed that you can be hammered by the reviewers ("my mate tried X power cable sighted once and he swears it was really good"), otherwise you'll be able to get your argument across IME.
 
Originally posted by michaelab
Judging by his response to a different letter in Issue 29 he's a self confessed luddite and probably doesn't have an e-mail account, much less access to the "inter-web" (his words) thingamy-bobby :D

Michael.

Here's the contact route: [email protected]

As RG claims to do all the editing himself, this should go straight to him.
 
Originally posted by Paul Ranson
We need a comfortable venue. ....
Paul has nicely set out the requirements - so now we need a venue and a date to start off with. Any suggestions?

Getting two identical cd/amp combinations might be more difficult than it seems. Getting a computer controlled "switcher" might also not be that easy. Those two things mean we might have to make do with someone swapping the cable (or not) manually according to a pre-generated random sequence which would of course have to be done obscured from the listeners. I would suggest that the listeners aren't allowed to see the "swapper" during the test so no sub-concious facial cues could give anything away.

As for the statistics, I used to know enough about doing this kind of thing and I should be able to drag it back into working order with reference to a book or two.

Michael.
 
Re: Re: Re: Roy Gregory has lost the plot this time...

Originally posted by michaelab

I agree that it isn't logical but that doesn't mean that it can't be happening for some as yet unknown reason. Unlike you I'm not willing to simply reject the idea out of hand just because it doesn't fit with current scientific knowledge.

My rejection of the idea isn't "out of hand".

From my side, no evidence has been provided to show that the cables in question have an effect. That many people believe that cables make a difference is neither here nor there, it still requires properly conducted tests to produce supporting evidence.

As for "current scientific knowledge", Maxwell's Equations were written in 1873!!! So, there been a large opportunity for the "power cord" brigade to get their act together.

If a DBT with the cable showed that differences were audible would you accept that they were real differences?

Sure. If a properly conducted (and that is key) test showed that a the differences were audible, then that would be a very interesting result.

Let me add though, it is easy to formulate a test with "nuisance variables" which would invalidate the test. For instance, if you were to use two CD players, even identical ones, I would still expect you to verify they were level matched before proceeding.

I should also add, that a repeatable experiment is important to eliminate statistical chance.

A demonstration that cables work is required before Science goes on a Crusade to explain why they work. It is unreasonable to expect Science to provide the "why" when there is no evidence of an actual phenomena.

I've always maintained that huge differences will always be succesfully DBT'able but usually they're so big you don't need a DBT to tell.

The issue is that many things are claimed in the hifi press to be readily discernable differences, and yet the journalists do not demonstrate this in a proper test. The readers swallow it hook line and sinker beleiving that the journalists are in some way gifted.

I disagree. The peer review system or, at least, the way it's implemented puts the balance of power heavily in favour of maintaining the status quo.

I can only disagree too :)

Here's the thing: no one likes peer review. It's a painful process for both sides: the authors want to get there work published, sometimes largely incomplete; the reviewers have to expend serious effort in diligent reviews, sometimes of basically flawed material.

If you want to challenge "the status quo" in Science, then you must accept the burden of proof is on you. The more solid the "conventional wisdom" the greater the effort and evidence you need to provide.

Bona fide scientists who have eventually come through with challenging ideas contrary to current, well established, thinking have often had to struggle for far longer than necessary to get peers to accept their ideas. Science on the whole gravitates to maintaining and reinforcing the status quo when instead it should be looking to challenge it as much as possible.

Well, then, just accept that Science is hard work. You cannot come charging in with a new hypothesis, simply on the strength that its new, unless your hypothesis has some supporting evidence. Again, the more evidence you have the better.

A GOOD IDEA is not enough...
 
Originally posted by Paul Ranson

We need a statistician to tell us how many listeners, how many trials and how many 'got it right' would be significant.

You need to know something about "type 1" vs "type 2" statistical errors, and also you need to quantify the "detection probability" (ie how likely it is you can hear the difference.)

Roughly speaking, if you think the test is easy (it's an obvious difference) then scoring 9 out of 10 is statistically significant and the probabity of making a type 2 error is also small.

OTOH, if you think it is hard (ie a small difference), then scoring 17 out 25 is what you should shoot for, in order to get "type 2" errors small.

If the setup were two 'identical' CDPs into an amp/speakers. The first round of tests is with identical mains cables. This should show identity if we have the levels etc right. The second is with a wanky wire. This should show a difference.

Level match CD Players to .1dB (use 1Khz test tone..)

And FWIW, just about every psycho-acoustic test is done on headphones because speakers/rooms introduce such a significant amount of distortion. If you can't "hear the cable" on phones, you've no chance with speakers..

The tests could be 'ABX', an excerpt of 'A', followed by 'B' followed by a randomly chosen A or B. Repeat until bored.

No, don't repeat until listener fatigue sets in...

It would be very useful to use a computer to control the CDPs and preamp/switcher. Does anybody know of an IR interface that does RC5?

Many pre-amps use standard remote sequences you can generate with LIRC (on linux). Most IR software doesn't have a "random X button/display" for you, but it's trivial with LIRC and a little programming. The "hard" part is getting an IR transmitter, but for a man of your means, I'd expect you to do what I did, and use the serial IR driver in conjunction with a simple homebrew circuit to amplify the serial signal so that sufficient current gets dumped into an IR led. (Google LIRC and you'll find links to the software and amp circuits..)

It's quite enlightening to do this, even if it sounds rather dull :) Good luck!
 

Latest posts

Back
Top