Some sense creeping into the hifi press at last?

michaelab said:
I'm guessing that the HF+ test methodology was flawed but will reserve judgement until I read the articles.
Click to expand...

Almost certainly flawed compared to say medical tests where you need a great many participants. I am not a statistician but I am a research scientist (PhD in physics) and I was happy with the methodology but the sample size was just three people. The cable scores showed some marked and I would guess statistically significant similarities across the three listeners. But this is from reported data after the test I haven't seen all of the numbers.

Interestingly one of the panellists works for a well known UK cable company and they blind test all of their developements and the competition. Again it won't be rigorous enough for any hardcore objectivist but it will be grist to the mill for the subjectivists and so the debate rumbles on.

What is interesting is I still don't think I would come to the same conclusions over a longer period with the same cables.


michaelab said:
When are they coming out Jason?
Click to expand...

Next issue which is due this month. I will try not to say anymore, don't want to ruin the article or be (rightly) accussed of advertising.

Cheers

Jason
 
Last edited by a moderator:
michael,
but surely if cable a has a 1 or 2 db attenuation due to it's construction method as compared to cable b and you level match them. then you are not allowing each cable to fully exploit it's unique properties.
cheers


julian
 
One thing that it's very easy to successfully blind test is a small level difference. So level matching is essential. A cable with a 1 or 2dB attenuation is faulty.

And given that the assertion by the cable fans is that something other than conventional bulk parameters of inductance, resistance and capacitance is affecting the sound then obviously that is what has to be tested, not small changes in frequency response caused by well known mechanisms.

BTW I think you could get James Randi to give you his $1m if you can hear a difference in cables or cable direction not attributable to LRC. Check out the Shakti Stone wriggling that's been going on over the last month or so on Audio Asylum and elsewhere.

Paul
 
Well you obviously have to use a suitable power amp to drive the speakers, which, in tun, have to be suitable for the room that you have.

As systems improve, they sound more similar than different. Approaching the apex of a pyramid from different directions results in the same end point.
 
ReJoyce said:
Glad you enjoyed an article that agrees with your viewpoint Michael.

Don't bother to read the Next couple of Plush's: "Blind Listening to Expensive cables - Can you hear the difference?"
... some marked and repeatable differences heard by a panel of three listeners.
Click to expand...
Jason,
I hope you will let us know when this is to be published. I would certainly be interested to read this article. If the author describe carefully and acurately how this claimed blind comparison was done then we could judge how much value to place on their conclusion.

It is certainly interesting to hear that some professional reviewers are applying their ears to the Art of Critical Listening.

Ps just saw your other response.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
michael,
you see, all the caveats come out of the woodwork claiming things that were never said in the origional assertion to do with frequency response, resistance, capacitance and level matching.
i've never said that 'better' and 'worse' sounding cables will measure the same or differently only that one will sound 'better' and one 'worse' all the measurement claptrap usually comes from those disputing the 'cable believers' position - funny that.
cheers


julian
 
julian2002 said:
all the measurement claptrap
Click to expand...
Measurements are not claptrap. The point is to show whether or not there lies something beyond the accepted norms of capacitance, resistance etc.
Sensory taste testing relies to a great extent on our ability to "remember" taste (common question would be: which of A, B, C taste the same). We are surprisingly good at this and tasting can be "taught" (some are significantly better naturally than others at this).
I wonder, in view of our famously bad "aural memory", how well you could shoehorn an audio DBX into this kind of framework - especially, as Jason has pointed out, to a statistically relevant sample.
Another interesting phenomena is that as our "taste buds" get tired, everything begins to taste the same...
 
sorry joel i perhaps should have said more clearly - 'all the claptrap spoken about measurement with reference to cable preference' in the example i gave i was told that a cable that attenuated the source was 'broken' i would call this claptrap. it just means that the 2 cables are different not that one is broken. i get the distinct feeling that this kind of reaction is a desperate attempt to load the results of any test to favour the doubters opinions rather than to truly discover if the differences between two (or more) cables are audiable.
cheers


julian
 
ReJoyce said:
... but the sample size was just three people.

Jason
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter to me if it was just one person. The point is if anyone can show that they can 'hear' cables, even if everyone else cannot.

Very pleased that a magazine has finally undertaken blind testing on cables. About b****y time!
 
Julian, to be fair two types of cable that differed only in that one was attenuated by a dB or two relative to the other would not be of any use. The user could get the same effect by just changing the volume setting by the same amount rather than buying a different cable. (Well unless, to be pedantic, using the attenuating cable meant you used a better part of the volume pot I suppose).
 
The point is if anyone can show that they can 'hear' cables, even if everyone else cannot.
Click to expand...

Who is this lone weirdo, and should we put them in a ducking stool, just in case?
:D

-- Ian
 
The 'claptrap' is the wriggling that goes on whenever an attempt is made to pin the cable believers down on what they actually believe. You won't win any prizes for hearing a small change in frequency response or level.

So Julian, do you believe that cables that measure the same at audio frequencies can sound different? Or that symmetrically constructed cables can sound different according to the direction they're used in?

Paul
 
martin,
all i'm saying is that if the attenuation was part of the cables 'character' (for want of a better word) then it should be taken as part of the cable's difference. loading the results by level matching - insistence on similar measurements etc. is skewing the test in my eyes. it doesn't let the cable show what it does and therefore any decisions made by the listeners is meaningless in the context of stating a preference for a particular cable.
cheers


julian
 
paul,
to be honest i've not given it much thought. i go with what i like. if i miss something when i take it out of my system then i'll buy it. if i dislike something when it's in my system then i won't. moderated by available funds of course.
that wasn't the dabate though. the issue was that 3 people had dbt'd some cables and expressed a consistent preference for one (if i';ve got what re-joyce was saying correct) at that point a sarcastic comment was made - i pointed out some small print and people started jumping on the bandwaggon.
in semi answer to your question yes i think that cables can and do sound different - i have no idea how measurements relate to these differences. i'd also agree that some manufacturers take the piss when it comes to prices but if the market will bear the price then good luck to them.
cheers


julian
 
julian2002 said:
loading the results by level matching - insistence on similar measurements etc. is skewing the test in my eyes. it doesn't let the cable show what it does and therefore any decisions made by the listeners is meaningless in the context of stating a preference for a particular cable.
Click to expand...

I think you're confusing "deciding preferences" with "determining differences" here. Determining a physical difference in a rigorous sense requires blind testing - deciding which you prefer does not, as long as you accept that you're not making your judgment purely on sonic grounds.

With regard to the cable test criteria, everyone can, or should, agree that in principle a cable that acts as (say) a progressive filter above 5kHz should be distinguishable. The question here is simply whether or not a cable can achieve anything that equalisation cannot, or anything that a volume control cannot in the case of the attenuating cable - and in fairness, virtually any cable should qualify for any of these "challenges" (with the exception of razor wire, or, ironically, some of the high-end exotic designs which actually do introduce distortion).
 
pete,
surely if a preference is stated then by inference there is a difference - otherwise there would be no preference.
blind or double blind testing should eliminate the non sonic differences such as colour, brand loyalty and elephantcockophillia ;) which i can see the point in. however hobbling a cable by adjusting the system so that it measures the same as the other cables on test seems nonsensical to me. at that point what exactly are you testing? the cable, the system or the listener?
cheers


julian
 

Latest posts

Back
Top