Forum poll.. Do you believe that hi-fi cables make any difference

[drummerman]

People do TV picture quality tests, tasting drinks, food etc. and don't need to visit a spa prior to the tests.

I think it shows that differences are not as night and day as some may think. They are either minute or simply not there.

Maybe they should and test would be more accurate ... .

We are often talking minute differences in sound, especially with cables, DAC's etc. so total relaxation before 'tests' (or auditioning) equipment is sure not a bad thing. How often does that happen though?

Too many people will show up if there is free spa and massage.

"I woke up this morning very skeptical about cables. And my back is acting up a bit."

 

[ID.]

DBT ... dont'ya just luv that.

So often quoted (and the naysayers/anti-snake oil brigades favorite term) yet hardly anybody has ever participated in one

DBT is a part of the scientific method and is designed to 'prove' certain assertions in as rigorous scientific manner as possible.

It is rarely carried out in hi-fi for the simple reason that it is complex, time consuming and expensive, and hi-fi is an unimportant hobby.

If people stopped making wild claims for what they hear in sighted tests, then I don't think that DBT would come up at all, as is so common these days, people do not let a lack of understanding stop them from putting forward their views, often most aggressively.

I have taken part in blind tests (not rigorous double blind) and the overwhelming outcome of such listening is just how difficult it can be to hear differences that were, to coin a phrase, night and day in sighted tests.

I make no other claims for what you can and can not hear in blind tests, just that is rather eyeopening should you ever have the chance to take part in one.

I did.

With this very publication.

Except that I don't think these tests are always that telling. - They are usually carried out in unfamiliar surroundings with unfamiliar music on an unfamiliar system, often there is still stress from finding the place, commuting and the test itself ie. getting it 'right' in front of other people present.

I think it was Townshend that once carried some tests out on Alpha Waves in relation to hifi. I can't remember exactly but it was something like twenty minutes of total relaxation required to chill out sufficiently to have anything approaching a meaningful dem of equipment. Hardly the environment of a DBT in strange and unfamiliar surroundings (nor a demo of equipment at a dealers with the pressures sometimes involved).

Perhaps if the above is carried out in the system owners home under controlled conditions but even that is not as straigth forward as it seems as you quite correctly pointed out.

Far to much faff involved plus this hobby involves listening with our eyes too. No matter how good something sounds, if it looks horrid in the surrounding in which it will be used its often no good to the owner.

So if something seems to sound better because it also appeals to the other senses ... it does sound better though it may be difficult to convince others likewise.

Which just goes to show how subtle the differences are. If the listener needs to be so coddled to have a chance of hearing the difference, in most cases it definitely isn't the day and night difference people often proclaim.

 

[iceman16]

As this is a thread is a poll has anyone tallied up the results yet?

I would kindly ask Vlad to do counting... as He's the "Forum member of the Year"

 

[hybridauth_Facebook_754925454652427]

No ABX test has ever shown that there are any audible differences.

There was even a blind test using a coathanger, and still no audible differences.

So, nope.

But mere facts can never compete with good marketing and people's willingness to believe....

 

[Infiniteloop]

No ABX test has ever shown that there are any audible differences.

There was even a blind test using a coathanger, and still no audible differences.

So, nope.

But mere facts can never compete with good marketing and people's willingness to believe....

Ah, but was it a 99.999999 pure copper coathanger, silver plated and shielded with several layers of exotic materials?

And did it make a difference which way round the coathanger was connected?

- I guess we'll never know.*biggrin*

 

[TrevC]

Do they make a difference? Yes, nothing works without them. The expensive ones are a money making scam, bought by the sort of person that thinks they could have won a lottery when they didn't buy a ticket. No sound improvements whatsoever, only placebo effects.

Happy New Year!!!

 

[Jota180]

What I or anyone else believes is irrelevant. Show me the results of double blind tests and I'd put more stock in that than someone's beliefs.

They usually show that there is no diffrence, in one famous test a pair of wire coathangers sounded as good as expensive cables.

Oddly people with expensive cables refuse to accept such tests lol

I'm not into audiophile cables at all. However, one issue with DBT I want to point out, is that it's not quite as straightforward as saying no differences exist.

IMO, DBT shows that IF any differences exist then they are incredibly subtle. Not that no one can tell the difference between cables. For example, John Atkinson (editor of the US HiFi Mag, Stereophile) has spoken quite a few times about participating in DBTs. In one test he and Micheal Fremmer (another Stereophile reviewer) got 4/5 an 5/5 cable comparisons right. However, their results were statistically insignificant. In other words, the vast majority of users couldn't tell the difference. While it's possible the the results for the two "experts" were just luck, I do think it shows that more reseach needs to be done. I'd love to see DBTs done with only "experts" and not the average man, as clearly the average man can't tell the differences.

So it is theoretically possible that some of those reviewers/experienced audiophiles can hear differences. But those differences would be so subtle that buying expensive cables would be a complete waste of money for the rest of us.

It's true that it cannot say there is no difference but what it does do is take the sight and knowledge of what is being used out of the equation and then all people have to go by is what their hear. A sample of 5 as you say is statistically insignificant but not so much for the reasons you suggest. 5 isn't a big enough number of samples. Ideally the number has to be much larger and then luck would/could play much less of a part.

 

[Vladimir]

Fun, Feathers, & Games in The High End

 

[Ajani]

Fun, Feathers, & Games in The High End

I think that article illustrates the point fairly well. For DBT to really determine whether anyone can hear differences, then the alledged experts need to be the ones to participate. The problem is that many of those persons seem to be either afraid of or just don't care about DBT.

IMO, DBT has already shown that any differences that might exist are so subtle that the majority of listeners can't identify them.

So when I'm allocating my budget for HiFi, I spend more on the components I know will make the biggest difference to sound quality.