The Cable Test - listen and decide

Funnily enough, when I knew there was a mega cable involved, they worked fine and delivered perceived "improvements" in my system! But if I got a friend/wife to change the cables without telling me which ones were in circuit, the cables sounded the same.

Hey, I'm just as subject to psycoacoustical phenomena as the next guy. I'm just not willing to pay for the illusion.

Chris

 

No ones expecting you to, mate.

 

But that's the whole point - what they think they hear if often influencded by what they see. It is extremely easy to demonstrate.

Surprising that so many people deny what is a proven effect.

Are you happy spending money on a difference that may not be real?

 

I was just joshing; I don't deny that awareness of a change will influence perception of it - that is, I think, beyond doubt.

Am I happy spending money on a difference that may not be real though? I think yes, I am. More fool me!

 

Do we know any blind audiophiles? Classic..


No but we sure as hell know plenty who go round with blinkers on,,, bmmmtschhh.

 

Yet you can make these points for the expensive amplifiers etc that you DO endorse!

I think if you know your system reasonably well (all) these sonic differences ae relatively easy to hear.

So, yes Rob, I would be/have been confident about buying many bits in the past.(+ doing no small amount of tweaking*).




*some of which goes badly as well as well.

 

No, nothing has to be "going on" at all. Illusion explains any perceived differences more than adequately. In fact, it's by far the likeliest explanation.

 

I've heard about some deaf, dumb and blind kid..........not sure if we can ask him though.

 

So what are we to conclude from that?

That the system needs to very revealing in the first place? The cable companies would take issue with that - they claim we all need them for all our systems don't they?

And if the system were so revealing to start with then why need the expensive cables - to add colouration perhaps?

Or maybe you are referring to high end only in which case that is a bit elitist & the cable companies would again take issue with that point.

I think the test demonstrated very small minute differences but did not demonstrate Night & Day (which is what dealers & the hifi press have often told me). I don't think you can argue against that & its pointless trying to defend the opposite point of view.

I was quite willing for this test to prove huge differences but as it stands I'll stick with Maplin. Money is better saved for a different cartridge or other component which will bring significant change. (note I do not say improvement).

 

UK,

Evidently you missed my post #96 earlier in the thread. Let me save you from digging:

"I didn't participate because I've found the differences in cables aren't worth getting worked up about. In my experience, it's largely small shifts in the frequency spectrum and on an extremely rare occasion, what appears to be a change in gain. Frankly, I'd be surprised if these differences survive any sort of testing with our Internet delivery system due to what must be minute distortions to begin with. Regardless, the differences (or lack of them) just aren't worth arguing over;-)"

My reference to a "revealing system" in post #196 includes the internet delivery system in this case.

I think we all agree differences between cables are small in comparison to TTs for example. The first virtual bake-off I participated in using TTs found many differences obscured and samples completely misleading by the end of the test due to problems ranging from basic system setup to the recording methods and delivery systems employed. If internet download bake-offs have this many issues with presenting clear-cut differences in the output from various TTs, I'd say cable differences are even more likely to be damaged or obscured until the testers get more experience and agree upon standards.

Without examining the actual setup in person and trying the leads in a known system capable of revealing differences (system price doesn't matter), I can only conclude this test simply proved these four particular cables have very little sound differences between them when recorded and delivered in this manner. Nothing more...

regards,

dave

P.S. In case this was missed earlier as well...I've found most inexpensive cables sound better than expensive ones.

I hope this post clarifies my position on the matter.

 

Sorry James but I can't talk myself out of what I hear. I have tried...

 

Ok. I missed the post & the underlying point - apologies.

Yes the web bake offs need to have standardised settings as far as is possible, & most participants are on a learning curve with that. It just needs time & commitment.

 

No problem UK.

If anyone can fine-tune the process and work out the bugs, it's Rob.

best,

dave

 

David, I'm sure you must be confusing me with someone else.

At home I use old Quad amps mostly, which aren't expensive.
I also own and use an A&R A60 which cost me £50.
The most expensive amp I recommend is a Cambridge 840 at £750, for those wanting lots of power, inputs, facilities and useable tone controls. I also have a World Design kit valve amp.

Nothing particularly exotic and certainly not expensive.
Expense is fine if it actually delivers benefits.

 

That's a problem for you to rationalise, not me. If you choose, for instance, "phenomena which science can't explain", that's fine, isn't it? You are unable to choose "I am mistaken", for some unknown reason.

 

I don't believe I've made a mistake - no need to choose it.

 

Delusions are very real to those who experience them. I deal with this sort of thing most days at work, although it's usually the "creepy-crawlies", rather than hi-fi delusions there.

 

LOL...if mine is a delusion it's rather benign. I think somehow, someway I'll be OK.

 

You'll be fine, and I'll just smile and nod. I have had a lot of practice over the years.

 

Thanks, Doc. I'll sleep better tonight ;-)