Does anyone actually know where you can find details of all the double blind speaker cable tests or double blind tests in relation to other kit. If they show a 'result' is that result credible??
-
When should you upgrade your hi-fi? How to control ‘upgradeitis’
The only blind cable test (not exactly the type of test you are looking for) I know of, is this one:
http://www.nordost.com/images/review-images/review-pdf/15-hifiplus_issue34.pdf
The result shows differences that were above chance....with the most expensive cable coming out on top and the cheapest cable generally scoring lower.
http://www.nordost.com/images/review-images/review-pdf/15-hifiplus_issue34.pdf
The result shows differences that were above chance....with the most expensive cable coming out on top and the cheapest cable generally scoring lower.
Have you ever watched the movie shallow hal?QuestForThe13thNote said:
My point is stop worrying about the fact that you are fooled by sighted hifi tests.
The fact that you believe the higher is costs the better its sounds should be good enough for you. So what if you couldn't tell the difference in a blind test as long as you still enjoy the music.
Leave the boring hifi mechanics and facts to us boring dire straits fans
abacus
Well-known member
All the links are in your other thread (You just chose to ignore them) and Yes, ABX testing is a scientific test method used in many scenarios, not just for Hi-Fi. (Interestingly Hi-Fi cable manufactures avoid testing this way which means they can’t have much confidence in their claims)
You also ignored all references to the pro world, where equipment is way beyond the capabilities of you system, (Most Hi-Fi is like a wind up gramophone in comparison) and they also say the same about cable not making a difference if correctly rated for the job.
Starting a new thread will not change any of this, so unless you can provide verifiable evidence that cables make a difference, (A personal opinion is not evidence) you are wasting your time.
Bill
You also ignored all references to the pro world, where equipment is way beyond the capabilities of you system, (Most Hi-Fi is like a wind up gramophone in comparison) and they also say the same about cable not making a difference if correctly rated for the job.
Starting a new thread will not change any of this, so unless you can provide verifiable evidence that cables make a difference, (A personal opinion is not evidence) you are wasting your time.
Bill
Andrewjvt said:
no I've never said expense is better. My hypothesis is 'is it possible to discern good and bad speaker cables in a good system, whatever the price of the cables'. You may think it is, but some people don't. And I think this isn't boring, it's fascinating as it's science and it asks a question often debated. Did you read it? Thanks
nopiano
Well-known member
Another magazine, which I feel it's a bit mean to mention here but will anyway, HiFi News have tested speakers cables methodically. Not printed online, but from about three years ago I recall. More controversially, they tested USB cables too. You can google various debates. The best are in the Naim forum where it apparently takes over a hundred hours to burn in a USB cable!!
Much the same debate runs in the musical world with music competitions, typically those with a solo instrument like piano or violin. Some feel juries and audiences are unduly affected by stage demeanour, dress, facial expressions etc. There have been auditions behind a curtain, sometimes at the preselection stage. For me the point of a live event is using all ones senses.
I find my reaction to (the current) live Prom broadcasts varies between those over the radio, and hence my Hi-Fi, and those on TV though a soundbase. All very interesting, but no clear conclusion!
Much the same debate runs in the musical world with music competitions, typically those with a solo instrument like piano or violin. Some feel juries and audiences are unduly affected by stage demeanour, dress, facial expressions etc. There have been auditions behind a curtain, sometimes at the preselection stage. For me the point of a live event is using all ones senses.
I find my reaction to (the current) live Prom broadcasts varies between those over the radio, and hence my Hi-Fi, and those on TV though a soundbase. All very interesting, but no clear conclusion!
CnoEvil said:
i read this and understood that what they are doing is using the same speaker wire type and interconnect (e.g. Chord signature interconnect, and chord signature speaker wire) in each test of 3 tracks against that cable. 3 people took part including Nigel Finn of chord. They are doing this twice and I see they picked one cable as their control in the first hi fi and another in the second hi fi, which they gave a score of 10 accross all.
but when I looked at the test and the scores you would expect the two cables they picked as controls might be low in overall rankings as these were designated a nominal 10 neutral score. They went lower for poorer cables and higher for better ones against this control. But to be fairer every cable should have been a control, to avoid any possible error.
But the nordost was the highest ranked but actually the third ranked in terms of most expense (out of 6 cables) when you add up the cost of the interconnect and the speaker wire. The cheapest cables in the qed came near the bottom, but the siltech was bottom but the second most expensive interconnect and speaker wire pairing. Then chord was good value for what it does, which I've always thought too. So on balance you can't really take much from this test, only small samples too.
but I don't think this hypothesis is right, as expensive cables are not necessarily better in a-b tests when you test cables. My hypothesis is to say 'in a good system its possible to discern from one another, different good and bad speaker wires, relating to how they perform in that system' . What would be much more convincing for me, would be to use lots of different hi Fi's and do double blind tests on known cables - one that is poorly performing and another good, to a persons tastes. Then double blind them and see if they can discern which ones. This would involve visiting lots of people with hi fi and testing it. I suspect you will find a very high steering towards discerning good and bad cables. This would put all argument over the expense v cheap is better thing to bed, as it would leave people to just judge on what is better, not matters of cost.
QuestForThe13thNote said:
Too busy playing air guitar in the mirror to walk of life in my underwear
My advise about cables is always the same:
- Take nobody's word for anything.
- Remain highly sceptical
- Try some cables at various prices in your own system...most good dealers will lend you some.
- Never spend more on a cable, than will bring a bigger improvement by spending the same money elsewhere.
- Don't assume expensive cables will give a sound that you will prefer. I can remember hearing Atlas Mavro (expensive) vs Asimi (eye-wateringly espensive)...and much preferring the Mavros in the system I was listening to (which was using Triangle Magellan Cello speakers).
- In a new system, use cheap, well made cables...and get very used to how your system sounds.....and only then experiment with cables at different prices.
- Take nobody's word for anything.
- Remain highly sceptical
- Try some cables at various prices in your own system...most good dealers will lend you some.
- Never spend more on a cable, than will bring a bigger improvement by spending the same money elsewhere.
- Don't assume expensive cables will give a sound that you will prefer. I can remember hearing Atlas Mavro (expensive) vs Asimi (eye-wateringly espensive)...and much preferring the Mavros in the system I was listening to (which was using Triangle Magellan Cello speakers).
- In a new system, use cheap, well made cables...and get very used to how your system sounds.....and only then experiment with cables at different prices.
QuestForThe13thNote said:
ABX tests are quite rare in hi-fi due, in the main, to technical difficulties. Harman are known to use this technique but do not puplish all their findings. Most speaker cable tests that I have seen have been conventional A/B tests and rarely double bind.
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/testing-audiophile-claims-and-myths.486598/
The above thread is not up to date, but does contain a fair number of blind tests of many different types.
These are so unbelievably unscientific in the sense of how they are conducted it's actually laughable. But gullible people rely on and believe them. Some of these could actually generate random results, if for instance you have no idea how familiar someone is with the hi fi, and aren't relating to real world situations of being aware of the hi fi.
I mean who would want a hypothesis of saying can one system be picked out in double blind against another to the position people don't know the hi fi, or dont own any of it, since when I make a decision on buying something like a cable, I have a system already. So the science test relates against a real world situation. But these tests of these forums are madness and not such. And making tests not related to real world situations of how and why we are buying the cables, means the tests are so unscientific to the situation we want to test, it beggars belief. You just add variables making quantification more difficult. The situation of buying a hi fi cable is to say, does it sound dramatically better than what I've got. If you could then say yes, and pick out in a double blind test, you've tested the reality of the situation. One you are familiar with.
If you said we want to test a hypothesis of picking out one system over another and two different systems prices and for a total newcomer, and the reasons you are doing it is to see if it's worth paying the greater amounts for the newbee, but the abx test reveals the person can't pick out the system, then its a fair thing to say a newbee can't pick out and the hypothesis is a fair test, subject to a sufficient sample size and good controls etc.
So the point is before you set out on a test it has to relate to real world situations, how we buy and what are we trying to achieve. If I just set out to say an abx test shows newbee people can't discern systems, I possibly can't apply that to question of whether someone who has a system and has an ear for hi fi already can discern things in a cable change. You would see what the statistical difference would be between the two groups, and whether significant, to say the ears have it. But what happens in this debate often, is people rather unintelligently apply the former test to the latter to make conclusions about the latter test over the former one, and it's ridiculously stupid and vacuous and just shows how they have no concept fir eliminating variables in science testing.
People don't understand the power of familiarity in hi fi to this testing too.
I mean who would want a hypothesis of saying can one system be picked out in double blind against another to the position people don't know the hi fi, or dont own any of it, since when I make a decision on buying something like a cable, I have a system already. So the science test relates against a real world situation. But these tests of these forums are madness and not such. And making tests not related to real world situations of how and why we are buying the cables, means the tests are so unscientific to the situation we want to test, it beggars belief. You just add variables making quantification more difficult. The situation of buying a hi fi cable is to say, does it sound dramatically better than what I've got. If you could then say yes, and pick out in a double blind test, you've tested the reality of the situation. One you are familiar with.
If you said we want to test a hypothesis of picking out one system over another and two different systems prices and for a total newcomer, and the reasons you are doing it is to see if it's worth paying the greater amounts for the newbee, but the abx test reveals the person can't pick out the system, then its a fair thing to say a newbee can't pick out and the hypothesis is a fair test, subject to a sufficient sample size and good controls etc.
So the point is before you set out on a test it has to relate to real world situations, how we buy and what are we trying to achieve. If I just set out to say an abx test shows newbee people can't discern systems, I possibly can't apply that to question of whether someone who has a system and has an ear for hi fi already can discern things in a cable change. You would see what the statistical difference would be between the two groups, and whether significant, to say the ears have it. But what happens in this debate often, is people rather unintelligently apply the former test to the latter to make conclusions about the latter test over the former one, and it's ridiculously stupid and vacuous and just shows how they have no concept fir eliminating variables in science testing.
People don't understand the power of familiarity in hi fi to this testing too.
I never suggested that these tests were scientific, though some are better than others.
Your abjections are the usual ones trotted out by those of your point of view. The evidence is what it is, it does not 'prove' anything but it strongly suggests that sighted tests are unreliable and in blind testing most of the differences heard in in sighted tests dissappear.
That is the weight of the evidence, take it as you will.
Your abjections are the usual ones trotted out by those of your point of view. The evidence is what it is, it does not 'prove' anything but it strongly suggests that sighted tests are unreliable and in blind testing most of the differences heard in in sighted tests dissappear.
That is the weight of the evidence, take it as you will.
steve_1979
Well-known member
CnoEvil said:
That's not correct. Most people accept what the evidence tells us provided that the evidence comes from a reliable source. Even if you don't like what the evidence is telling you you'd be daft not to accept it just because it tells you something that you don't want to hear or goes against your current beliefs.
I'm generalising here not just talking about ABX cable tests.
I agree with everything CnoEvil said in post #9. There's a lot of wisdom in what he's said.
Quest makes valid points in post #12 about the non-sequitor nature of applying newby blind tests to someone with an existing system where they are looking to maximise performance through cable selection.
Quest makes valid points in post #12 about the non-sequitor nature of applying newby blind tests to someone with an existing system where they are looking to maximise performance through cable selection.
steve_1979 said:
It all depends on the evidence you look at....and everybody tries to find the evidence that supports their position and ignore the evidence that doesn't.
"Trust those that seek the truth, but doubt those who say they've found it" - Andre Gide
Anyway, I'm not arguing about it. If you are happy you are right, it's fine by me. *biggrin*
CnoEvil said:
No. I know that alcohol increases confidence. I only drive if I know that I am safe, based on the amount drunk, and the rate at which alcohol is metabolised. Thus half a pint of beer is fine, but two pints ober one hour is far too much even if I feel okay, and even though I am probably under the legal limit. The same is true with hifi, I can accept reasonable evidence, as I know I can be fooled.
CnoEvil said:
I don't and I suspect many if not most people do not. I am more interested in the truth.
steve_1979
Well-known member
Leif said:
...and that's as it should be.
I have come to my conclusions by listening to a lot of cables, in a lot of systems.
- Do I insist I'm right....no I don't.
- Do I respect different POVs....yes of course.
- Do I try to impose my opinion on others....no I don't; though I do encourage people to try for themselves. I take the view that if you trust your ability to pick components you like, then you can trust that ability won't suddenly desert you, when trying cables.
If you can't trust anything you hear, then you should find another hobby. *wink*
Freddy58
Well-known member
CnoEvil said:
I would never trust my senses. When I look in the mirror, I see this old bloke looking back. That can't be right *biggrin*
Gazzip
Well-known member
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
-
Something is not right and I’m hoping a forum member will help me
- Started by Fuel4life1234
- Replies: 7
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram