Ben K. said:
I don't want to get involved in these endless debates on whether cables can or can't make a difference but I can't help but wonder why people keep referring to science? I'm a biologist which does not qualify me to comment either way in this debate however I have yet to see someone produce an article that has been published in a scientific journal supporting either side of the argument. Links to websites and things found on google are not credible in the world of science I'm afraid. I know some people are in engineering and I respect your views from that point of view but could other people stop referring to science unless they can produce published articles.
I would imagine that scientists have far more worthwhile things to study than the validity of audiophool snake oil claims. It's not exactly cutting edge science is it? - more like 'O' level physics; or at least it was in my day. Would a physics text book qualify as a published article?
Actually, are there any of you out there who believe in this nonsense who also have, let's say, an engineering degree? A physics 'A' level? Just curious.
It's far more likely that trading standards will get more involved - and its good to see that they've started - to at least ensure that fanciful claims are eliminated from advertising. I don't suppose that much can be done about the night and day differences that many magazine/review writers claim to hear, especially as so many of them depend on sponsorship from manufacturers for their income.