cables and the foo fighters brigade ...

[CnoEvil]

Really? I find that hard to believe.

Every type of prescribed medicine you take will have been through extensive testing.

mp3 and other lossy codecs were developed with the aid of extensive double blind testing.

Would you buy a car without looking at the performance figures and mileage consumption?

Would you buy a house without having a survey done?

Ever bought or looked at Which? magazine when contemplating the purchase of a cooker, washing machine, tumble drier or similar?

Would you get on an aeroplane that hadn't been exhaustively tested?

We take for granted that all our buildings, bridges etc have been carefully designed and engineered by qualified people, steel and concrete samples will have been tested to destruction to confirm that their properties conform to specification.

That's all off the top of my head but there must be so many more examples.

Or do you base all your purchasing decisions on unverifiable marketing claims?

Your points are quite valid, given I didn't make myself clear due to rushing out the door, as my daughter needed left to work. So let me try and explain a bit better.

The verifiable measurements that I was talking about, are the ones that an individual (audiophile) is expected to produce in order to validate what they are hearing. It has nothing to do with the necessary testing to which you are rightly referring. i am saying that we don't go through life lugging about intricate test equipment in order to provide proof that what we feel. see and hear are real.

What a commercial company does to safely bring a product to market has little to do with how an individual chooses a hifi system.

When buying a car, just like buying a Hifi, I make a shortlist based on figures and then drive them and make my decision based on the subjective feel of the thing (just like Hifi). i don't do a double blind test!

If you have personally done any ABX or double blind tests in any other area of your life to make a decision, it would be good to hear about it. Did you even do them when chosing your own system?

Music, like Art, is a subjective experience, where measurements only get you so far and where the things that can often sway your decision, are hard, if not impossible to measure.

How do I personally make my decisions? Well I take the following into account:

- Experience, of which I've nearly 40 years worth to draw on; as well as an understanding of what I like and how to achieve it.

- Reviews (personal and professional), which if you read enough of them, can give an idea of what should make a shortlist.

- Measurements, which help with making sure that the components are compatible....ie. Not matching an unsuitable amp with hard to drive speakers.

- Listening to live (unmiked music), which provides a benchmark

- And lastly and by far the most important, listening and making a subjective judgement as to whether I like it. The things i look for generally can't be measured like coherence, believability, immediacy, authority and refinement.

FWIW. I don't take anything I'm told "as read" until I have checked it out for myself. Then, if I'm wrong, at least it was my own mistake to make.

Whether Objectivist or Subjectivist, our own experience and belief system can be as much of a hindrance as a help...which is why I said both sides should try and learn from each other and show a little more empathy for the other POV.

 

[Electro]

I'm afraid you are not taking this topic seriosly. Marketing is evil.

The 20th century's industrialization has left the world permanently overcrowded, polluted and stagnant by the turn of the 21st century. In 2022, with 40 million people in New York City alone, housing is dilapidated and overcrowded; homeless people fill the streets; 20 million are unemployed, the few "lucky" ones with jobs are barely scraping by, and food and working technology is scarce. Most of the population survives on rations produced by the Soylent Corporation, whose newest product is Soylent Green, a green wafer advertised to contain "high-energy plankton", more nutritious and palatable than its predecessors "Red" and "Yellow", but in short supply.

New York City Police Department detective Frank Thorn lives with his aged friend Solomon "Sol" Roth. Due to Roth's advanced age he remembers life before its current miserable state and routinely waxes nostalgic for his youth when the air was clean and the weather wasn't perpetually summer.

Roth takes Soylent's oceanographic reports to a like-minded group of researchers known as the Exchange, who agree that the oceans no longer produce the plankton from which Soylent Green is reputedly made, and infer that it must be made from human remains, as this is the only conceivable supply of protein that matches the known production. Unable to live with this discovery, Roth seeks assisted suicide at a government clinic called "Home".

Soylent Green

[/quote]

Soylent Green may be a bit Cheesy and very 70's in style but it had a profound effect on me when I first saw it many years ago , I have never forgotten it's message and as time has passed more and more of it's content seem to be coming to pass .

I think everyone should take the time to watch it and try and understand it's message before it is too late .

 

[CnoEvil]

Entrenched? Not me.

Definition of Entrench: Establish (an attitude, habit, or belief) so firmly that change is very difficult or unlikely

I think I even saw your name listed as an example.

BTW. Being entrenched doesn't mean you are wrong, only that you won't be changing your mind any time soon.

 

[TrevC]

How do you sex a handbag, anyway? Where can I learn to do it, and maybe even get a job doing it?

A female handag is usually large enough to fit a kitchen sink in.

 

[pauln]

Really? I find that hard to believe.

Every type of prescribed medicine you take will have been through extensive testing.

mp3 and other lossy codecs were developed with the aid of extensive double blind testing.

Would you buy a car without looking at the performance figures and mileage consumption?

Would you buy a house without having a survey done?

Ever bought or looked at Which? magazine when contemplating the purchase of a cooker, washing machine, tumble drier or similar?

Would you get on an aeroplane that hadn't been exhaustively tested?

We take for granted that all our buildings, bridges etc have been carefully designed and engineered by qualified people, steel and concrete samples will have been tested to destruction to confirm that their properties conform to specification.

That's all off the top of my head but there must be so many more examples.

Or do you base all your purchasing decisions on unverifiable marketing claims?

Your points are quite valid, given I didn't make myself clear due to rushing out the door, as my daughter needed left to work. So let me try and explain a bit better.

The verifiable measurements that I was talking about, are the ones that an individual (audiophile) is expected to produce in order to validate what they are hearing. It has nothing to do with the necessary testing to which you are rightly referring. i am saying that we don't go through life lugging about intricate test equipment in order to provide proof that what we feel. see and hear are real.

We expect those things to have been done for us, as they are for the examples I gave. We don't test medicines ourself for instance.

What a commercial company does to safely bring a product to market has little to do with how an individual chooses a hifi system.

When buying a car, just like buying a Hifi, I make a shortlist based on figures and then drive them and make my decision based on the subjective feel of the thing (just like Hifi). i don't do a double blind test!

That would be rather dangerous!

If you have personally done any ABX or double blind tests in any other area of your life to make a decision, it would be good to hear about it. Did you even do them when chosing your own system?

No. I've done sighted comparisons on kit, I've heard clear differences with speakers and headphones, possible differences with amps and no differences with dacs and cables. I don't have the facilities for double blind or abx testing. I've used the foobar plugin abx comparator and have not been able to reliably distinguish between flacs and mp3 @ 320kb/s.

Music, like Art, is a subjective experience, where measurements only get you so far and where the things that can often sway your decision, are hard, if not impossible to measure.

Agreed, however equipment is not music.

How do I personally make my decisions? Well I take the following into account:

- Experience, of which I've nearly 40 years worth to draw on; as well as an understanding of what I like and how to achieve it.

- Reviews (personal and professional), which if you read enough of them, can give an idea of what should make a shortlist.

- Measurements, which help with making sure that the components are compatible....ie. Not matching an unsuitable amp with hard to drive speakers.

- Listening to live (unmiked music), which provides a benchmark

- And lastly and by far the most important, listening and making a subjective judgement as to whether I like it. The things i look for generally can't be measured like coherence, believability, immediacy, authority and refinement.

FWIW. I don't take anything I'm told "as read" until I have checked it out for myself. Then, if I'm wrong, at least it was my own mistake to make.

Pretty much the same as me then!

Whether Objectivist or Subjectivist, our own experience and belief system can be as much of a hindrance as a help...which is why I said both sides should try and learn from each other and show a little more empathy for the other POV.

I used to be a 'believer' until I did some comparisons, learnt some facts, looked at measurements and then re-read the marketing blurb. I would never buy anything else based on unsubstantiated advertising or marketing claims; I don't know why hifi should be any different. I would say that I have looked at both sides and have indeed swapped sides. Many of the believers on here refuse point blank to even look at anything that does not conform with their beliefs; it is this head in the sand attitude together with their propensity to suggest to newbies that they should spend from a quarter up to a third (!!) of their budget on cables that makes me continue to post on the subject.

My replies in bold italics above.

 

[Vladimir]

Few misconceptions about what objectivists say need to be addressed.

1) We don't say cables don't make a difference. We say many cables don't make an audible difference despite what manufacturers marketing and paid reviews claim.

2) We don't want audiophiles to do DBT and ABX before every purchase. We want every manufacturer to do measurements and DBT for every product performance marketing claim and provide results of tests in public and be legaly liable about the truthfullness of those results.

Or to sum it up, We want manufacturers and media to stop selling lies and start selling real performance for our money.

How can you opose that?

 

[Ajani]

What is the point of being a (HiFi Forum) foo fighter?

I actually believe most of HiFi is foo, but I don't see the point of trying to convince everybody else of that.

I see the point of making ultra-expensive cables: $$$. It's a business. Whether the product makes a useful sonic difference or not is beside the point.

I also see the point of small brands, that claim their products are as good as anything else regardless of price, wanting to "fight foo", since it is in their best interest to convince all of us that everything they don't sell is foo...

But what does an individual forum member get from convincing others that expensive cables don't make a difference?

I'm sure the guy who is about to drop $15K on cables is not in a desperate financial position and in need of my advice. If he thinks it makes a difference, it's his money to spend. And even if I somehow convince him that a cheap pair of cables would do the same job. it's not as if he's suddenly going to donate the remainder of the $15K to charity. He'll just spend it on some other hobby... Maybe get a nice watch...

Most of our HiFi squabbles just seem so utterly pointless.

Someone that isn't so well off might waste a high proportion of their budget on pointless things like mains leads, and the truth is important.

The point remains the same. HiFi is not essential. It is a luxury we choose to spend our money on. With all the injustices in the world worth campaigning about; HiFi Foo just doesn't make the cut.

Do you think it's OK to rip someone off because they have a higher income than you?

Nope. I neither claimed nor implied that.

The point is that it is a futile endeavour. Having convinced someone that those expensive cables don't make a difference, do you then go on and convince them that their $500 jeans are not substantially better than a $50 pair? That their rolex is no more accurate than a timex? That their designer sunglasses are also a ripoff? That their $100 bottle of wine is no better than a $10 bottle?

Most of thte things we spend money can't really be justified based on realy value. Diamonds are worthless rocks (that are not rare, despite claims otherwise). Try convincing persons to stop buying overpriced engagement rings and instead to put that money into a savings plan, and see how well that goes.

 

[TrevC]

Entrenched? Not me.

Definition of Entrench: Establish (an attitude, habit, or belief) so firmly that change is very difficult or unlikely

I think I even saw your name listed as an example.

BTW. Being entrenched doesn't mean you are wrong, only that you won't be changing your mind any time soon.

So if I was to say that the sun produces all the natural light and heat on earth and subsequently refuse to reconsider that statement you would describe it as an entrenched position, whereas I would call it knowing the facts.

 

[pauln]

Entrenched? Not me.

Definition of Entrench: Establish (an attitude, habit, or belief) so firmly that change is very difficult or unlikely

I think I even saw your name listed as an example.

BTW. Being entrenched doesn't mean you are wrong, only that you won't be changing your mind any time soon.

sub·jec·tive

/səbˈdʒɛk tɪv/ [suh b-jek-tiv]

Adjective

1. existing in the mind; belonging to the thinking subject rather than to the object of thought (opposed to objective).

2. pertaining to or characteristic of an individual; personal; individual: a subjective evaluation.

3. placing excessive emphasis on one's own moods, attitudes, opinions, etc.; unduly egocentric.

4. Philosophy . relating to or of the nature of an object as it is known in the mind as distinct from a thing in itself.

5. relating to properties or specific conditions of the mind as distinguished from general or universal experience

 

[pauln]

Diamonds are worthless rocks (that are not rare, despite claims otherwise).

Where the [EDITED BY MODS] did you get that idea from?

 

[Vladimir]

Consumer awareness is not a futile endeavour. It saved millions of lives from the tobacco industry.

10 Evil Vintage Cigarette Ads Promising Better Health

 

[the record spot]

How can you possibly substantiate a claim like that?

Plenty here have repeatedly said that they have tried other cables and not heard any difference. Oh sorry, that's because they have defective hearing.

Who mentioned defective hearing?!

And do point to any recent examples of those who are 'anti cables' comparing to their bog standard stuff.

Chord Chorus - £200+

Atlas Navigator -£200+

Monster Interlink 400 - £40 or so I'd guess

Another Chord cable (circa £50)

Fisual RCA - £10

... and that's just this year, never mind the rest. Minimal differences.

 

[Ajani]

Diamonds are worthless rocks (that are not rare, despite claims otherwise).

Where the [EDITED BY MODS] did you get that idea from?

Funny that I can see the actual swear word you wrote, when I quote you

Anyway, just google "are diamonds rare?" and you'll see loads of articles on the matter.

Here's one from the Washington Post:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/02/AR2010070203990.html

 

[TrevC]

HiFi is not essential. It is a luxury we choose to spend our money on. With all the injustices in the world worth campaigning about; HiFi Foo just doesn't make the cut.

So making dishonest claims for a hifi product is perfectly acceptable in your eyes. Interesting.

 

[CnoEvil]

Few misconceptions about what objectivists say need to be addressed.

1) We don't say cables don't make a difference. We say many cables don't make an audible difference despite what manufacturers marketing and paid reviews claim.

2) We don't want audiophiles to do DBT and ABX before every purchase. We want every manufacturer to do measurements and DBT for every product performance marketing claim and provide results of tests in public and be legaly liable about the truthfullness of those results.

Or to sum it up, We want manufacturers and media to stop selling lies and start selling real performance for our money.

How can you opose that?

I have no problem with that., but..

From my POV, if someone says that cables make no audible difference, I am personally interested in whether they have actually tried a good selection. If they have, then I am interested in what they have tried and on the end of what kit.

The usual answer I get to this question is "there's no point as it can't make a difference".

What would be nice to hear, just occasionly is, "I don't see how there could possibly be a difference, but I'll give some TQ Blacks a go just to make sure, and report back."

I chose TQ Black, as IIRC every single person on this forum who have tried them, have heard a clear difference....most liked what they heard and some didn't. Whether correct or not, that is a statistically significant result.

 

[PEAYEL]

For me, the biggest differences have always been heard in the component change part of the audio buying process, speakers and amplifiers tbh. Be they improvements or just a new sound that I like. Hey, I've moved from the Linn sound to Cyrus sound, simply because it makes me want to play air guitar (exciting), pogo in my seat and presents everything so well and when needed makes the hair stand up on my neck.

As I work as a sound engineer, I have found this also to be true in the studios where I have worked. Indeed until recently, my speakers were wired with studio grade Piranha Speakerflex 1.5 mm or Klotz cable, simply because it gets used for microphones, guitars, keyboards et al in the studio and it picks up no external noise etc, also I slide my speakers around a bit if there's too much or not enough of anything and this cable is flexible. Downside is that it's thick,black and ugly as sin. Similarly my components were interconnected with DIY Piranha/Klotz/Neutrik stuff because I could make it to the exact length. It gave me piece of mind etc and I couldn't hear night and day differences, even when i borrowed cables from studios that were refurbishing, eg Nordost, Chord, Zu Audio, QED etc. This approach I would suggest to anyone before they spend on premade cables, again because very high quality plugs and silver solder can be bought cheaply these days. Satisfaction guaranteed with this DIY approach.

Anyway, I digress a little, when people ask me generally, I never recommend a brand just say that as long as you go for OFC copper or silver and 79 strand or higher, with a good outer protection then all will be well. When I get asked about types of sound and details, I lend them my spare cables to play around with and let their ears decide. My biggest advice is DON'T RUSH, there's no point, you can decide at leisure on the sound and quality that you want after listening to your kit for a few months.

 

[TrevC]

.

 

[Ajani]

Consumer awareness is not a futile endeavour. It saved millions of lives from the tobacco industry.

And how many lives do you expect to save by alerting the public to the "dangers" of HiFi Foo? As I've said before: With all the problems in the world worth campaigning about, HiFi Foo is not one of them. I see nothing wrong with expressing an opinion on whether an item is foo. But the constant arguing over it is truly futile. Are there really that many audiophiles who don't know what DBT is? Who have never heard the claims of Foo Fighters? So why argue with persons who know what you believe, but clearly don't agree with you?

 

[TrevC]

Few misconceptions about what objectivists say need to be addressed.

1) We don't say cables don't make a difference. We say many cables don't make an audible difference despite what manufacturers marketing and paid reviews claim.

2) We don't want audiophiles to do DBT and ABX before every purchase. We want every manufacturer to do measurements and DBT for every product performance marketing claim and provide results of tests in public and be legaly liable about the truthfullness of those results.

Or to sum it up, We want manufacturers and media to stop selling lies and start selling real performance for our money.

How can you opose that?

I have no problem with that., but..

From my POV, if someone says that cables make no audible difference, I am personally interested in whether they have actually tried a good selection. If they have, then I am interested in what they have tried and on the end of what kit.

The usual answer I get to this question is "there's no point as it can't make a difference".

What would be nice to hear, just occasionly is, "I don't see how there could possibly be a difference, but I'll give some TQ Blacks a go just to make sure, and report back."

I chose TQ Black, as IIRC every single person on this forum who have tried them, have heard a clear difference....most liked what they heard and some didn't. Whether correct or not, that is a statistically significant result.

If you make another cable with exactly the same electrical characteristics as your TQ blacks it would sound exactly the same. I reckon I could do that for about a fiver.

 

[Frank Harvey]

If you make another cable with exactly the same electrical characteristics as your TQ blacks it would sound exactly the same. I reckon I could do that for about a fiver.

And paying yourself how much of a wage? And what would be the hourly rate for that? What's the budget for advertising and packaging? Parts cost? And is that including buying a TQ Black i/c to compare the properties you're talking about?

 

[TrevC]

Consumer awareness is not a futile endeavour. It saved millions of lives from the tobacco industry.

And how many lives do you expect to save by alerting the public to the "dangers" of HiFi Foo? As I've said before: With all the problems in the world worth campaigning about, HiFi Foo is not one of them. I see nothing wrong with expressing an opinion on whether an item is foo. But the constant arguing over it is truly futile. Are there really that many audiophiles who don't know what DBT is? Who have never heard the claims of Foo Fighters? So why argue with persons who know what you believe, but clearly don't agree with you?

It has nothing to do with safety (well, not entirely true because some foo mains leads have been found to be dangerous), but everything to do with honesty.

 

[CnoEvil]

sub·jec·tive

/səbˈdʒɛk tɪv/ [suh b-jek-tiv]

Adjective

1. existing in the mind; belonging to the thinking subject rather than to the object of thought (opposed to objective).

2. pertaining to or characteristic of an individual; personal; individual: a subjective evaluation.

3. placing excessive emphasis on one's own moods, attitudes, opinions, etc.; unduly egocentric.

4. Philosophy . relating to or of the nature of an object as it is known in the mind as distinct from a thing in itself.

5. relating to properties or specific conditions of the mind as distinguished from general or universal experience

Which is why the enjoyment of music is subjective. I buy the system that sounds good to me....good measurements are nice to have, but are not uppermost on my mind when listening.

Objective measurements aren't a guarantee of enjoyment........which is why subjective listening is the safest bet.

 

[John Duncan]

Diamonds are worthless rocks (that are not rare, despite claims otherwise).

Where the [EDITED BY MODS] did you get that idea from?

It's true. I was once offered a job by De Beers (which I turned down), and I found out an awful lot.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Beers

EDIT - actually it was their rough diamond arm:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diamond_Trading_Company

 

[Vladimir]

Ajani, our ambition is to save our pockets and our dignity. Not a noble goal like saving lives but still a worthy cause IMO.

Objectivists are the white blood cells fighting for the GREATER GOOD. If we kill everyone in an autoimmune disease, well... sorry.

 

[pauln]

Diamonds are worthless rocks (that are not rare, despite claims otherwise).

Where the **** did you get that idea from?

Funny that I can see the actual swear word you wrote, when I quote you

Anyway, just google "are diamonds rare?" and you'll see loads of articles on the matter.

Here's one from the Washington Post:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/02/AR2010070203990.html

Much of the cost is related to mining and processing costs. The average ore grade for diamonds is around 1 gramme per 100 tonnes ore mined, for gold it is between 100 and 1000 grammes per 100 tonnes ore mined. (The lower grades are mined opencast and therefore cheaper thus economical)

Wiki says that the annual diamond production is 26 tonnes of which 20% is gem quality - just over 5 tonnes or 25 million carats. I'd call that rare myself. (Production of gold was around 2600 tonnes in 2012, copper was 18,000,000 tonnes.) In the US alone there are over 2 million marriages per year apparently; the average engagement ring has a 1 carat diamond - so there's close to 10% of the production gone right there.

People 'spin' their articles in newspapers to support their political viewpoints. I don't really take anything at face value...