What is good hi fi for you

[ellisdj]

Thats what I mean so when you was reading magazines surely logic would have said - right there is tons of these on the market so lets get a big selection together and try them all out, lets try all different combos and then see if there anything in it. You must have been trying just out of curiosity otherwise why bother at all - I dont understand why you even bothered testing what you did to me its like arranging to test drive a car and only driving it in the car park,

Bearing in mind I wasnt old enough for hifi 30 years ago so no idea what the selection was like back then. I assume there was more to try than mains core and 79 strand.

Only because logic would make me think I tried this phono cable and it made no difference it must be S**T lets try another one from a different company to see what that is like. Is that not a logical thing to do for a test?

 

[shadders]

However most (I cannot think of any) DAC's of any note do not support a wireless or Ethernet input, so you need to convert the network signal to I2S, AES3, S/Pdif or USB to get the signal in to your DAC. Any networking benefit is therefore lost.

Our Yamaha R-N602 receives AirPlay directly, uses the internal DAC and then amplifies the analogue signal. Integration is the way forward, it seems. However, I don't know which internal conversion and cabling is used inside the box. But the signal paths are as short as they can be, which has to be a good thing.

A short cable/signal path is also to my mind a good thing. However there is a school of thought (not just audiophools) that 1.5m is the optimum length for digital cables...

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f6-dac-digital-analog-conversion/minimum-length-75-coax-cable-revisited-17280/

The link above takes you to a nice "I'm right...no I'm right...no I'm right" forum thread. Make your own mind up as to where within the truth lies...

Hi,

My approach would be that to ensure that the source impedance and sink (receiver) impedance is 75ohm which is the same as the characteristic impedance of the coaxial cable. The equipment designs should have ensured that this is implemented, and if not, then I would be, perhaps, concerned over the design quality of the system. Given this, cable length, ensuring not too long, is not an issue.

With regards to the link statements on reflections, I only read the first few comments, but reflections should not be an issue. If there are reflections, then they will have decayed significantly and very quickly compared to each bit duration, hence not affecting the signal. This assumes that the cable is constructed adequately, and the environment is generally not noisy.

If you wish, I can sell you a cable for £399 per 1metre that has double screened sheathing, gold central connection for the BNC, soldered with silver alloy solder. You will be amazed at the improvement in sound. Absolute bargain, available in many colours, which may or may not give you an enhanced experience, and may save you having to paint the carpet to match the colours.

You can purchase them from :

http://www.peoplewithmoremoneythanf*ckingsense.com

Regards,

Shadders.

Thanks for the kind offer Shadders, but as I said before I don't really do fancy cables.

What I am aiming to do is to keep an open mind, try new stuff, make up my own mind about certain things. I find that makes my life so much more interesting than it would be if all I did was to parrot other people's views, and in doing so I closed down my own sphere of personal experience.

Try some stuff Shadders and report back your own primary experiences to the forum for a change.

Hi,

I have tried cables and there are no differences. I am not repeating parrot fashion I understand electrical and electronic engineering. So do many others on this forum.

People are also aware of expectation bias, with regards to known areas where there is no scientific basis for selling "special" products.

On this thread I have commented that the Isolator may provide benefits.

I do have an open mind, but that does not mean I should absolve myself of common sense to appease others and their point of view.

Regards,

Shadders.

Science has no explanation for the make up 96% of the universe, and yet you and your cohort take it upon yourselves to tell people day in and day out that anything with no scientifically proven basis has no basis whatsoever and does not exist. Stepping outside of that "proven" 4% (which is disproved and re-defined every few years by the next bright spark scientist) is absolvement of common sense is it? Do you have any idea how ridiculous that sounds?

Hi,

You are inferring that since scientists do not know the specifics with regards to dark energy and dark matter, that all current scientific advances which provide every technological device, or other, is therefore invalid. in addition that there are secrets about a bit of wire which has been studied for the past 150 years, yet to be discovered. Also, double blind testing showing that no one can tell one cable apart from another.

Why should anyone be sceptical about established facts just because someone believes a cable sounds different, despite that they cannot, under controlled conditions, tell one bit of wire from another.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

[shadders]

Thats what I mean so when you was reading magazines surely logic would have said - right there is tons of these on the market so lets get a big selection together and try them all out, lets try all different combos and then see if there anything in it. You must have been trying just out of curiosity otherwise why bother at all - I dont understand why you even bothered testing what you did to me its like arranging to test drive a car and only driving it in the car park,

Bearing in mind I wasnt old enough for hifi 30 years ago so no idea what the selection was like back then. I assume there was more to try than mains core and 79 strand.

Only because logic would make me think I tried this phono cable and it made no difference it must be S**T lets try another one from a different company to see what that is like. Is that not a logical thing to do for a test?

Hi,

I tried an expensive cable because the hifi press in general promoted this, that is, cables sound different, and generally, more expensive is therefore better.

I tried biwiring later to see if I could tell any difference.

In both cases I could not tell any difference.

So I have tried and heard no difference, and studied the scientific aspects, and realised that a well specified cable will be no different to another well specified cable, which my testing has also concurred with.

As long as the cable is of sufficient specification, cable A will sound no different from cable B, C, D, E,..., or Z.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

[Gazzip]

Hi,

You are inferring that since scientists do not know the specifics with regards to dark energy and dark matter, that all current scientific advances which provide every technological device, or other, is therefore invalid. in addition that there are secrets about a bit of wire which has been studied for the past 150 years, yet to be discovered. Also, double blind testing showing that no one can tell one cable apart from another.

Why should anyone be sceptical about established facts just because someone believes a cable sounds different, despite that they cannot, under controlled conditions, tell one bit of wire from another.

Regards,

Shadders.

You are inferring that since scientists do not know the specifics with regards to dark energy and dark matter - Yes I am.

that all current scientific advances which provide every technological device, or other, is therefore invalid. - Ermmm... I don't think I said that bit. Why did you suggest I did?

that there are secrets about a bit of wire which has been studied for the past 150 years, yet to be discovered. - I am suggesting that this may be a possibility.[/b]

Also, double blind testing showing that no one can tell one cable apart from another. - I gave my views on double blind testing earlier in this thread. They are designed to confuse and there are too many variables in music which[/b] is made up of multiple tones at multiple amplitudes, interspersed with varying intervals of (more or less) silence, all constantly changing. Too much for the human mind to decipher under duress. The single blind "Pepsi Challenge" I do however consider to be valid.

 

[ellisdj]

Shadders you appear a very logical person that why I brought it up in the first place

I assumed A logical person if they was doing a test would either not do it at all or do it methodically and worthwhile.

So select 5 examples that cover different options - copper, silver, solid, stranded, screened not screened and try them all. Or 5 differnet 5 star magazine review cables or 5 different manufacturers or 5 different price points - a selection

Then after testing them maybe add another variable i.e. put better speaker cable in the system and do the 5 tests again.

Just to make sure the result wasnt being influenced or skewed because of one factor. Then a logical methodical person would pat themself on the back and say fair play that was a comprehensive test.

That is why I mentioned acoustics because the cable you tried was in my mind clearly terrible, price is irrelevant it was clearly terrible or maybe it might have made a small difference but the effect of the room on the sound was greater than the effect of 1 cable on the system (another reason I suggested trying a full loom).

I can think of a very apt example - the Kef Muo system at the hifi deluxe show - all serious Chord Electronics equiipment Multi Award winning Dave Dac all wonderfully engineered boxes, a serious system and it sounded like "a school disco" to use Gazzip words. Why was that - it was the room it was in having that much effect on the sound of the system even one that good sounded that bad.

I doubt I would have heard any difference changing 1 phono cable in that system either. I am not trying to start arguing but surely you can see where I am on this?

 

[shadders]

Hi,

You are inferring that since scientists do not know the specifics with regards to dark energy and dark matter, that all current scientific advances which provide every technological device, or other, is therefore invalid. in addition that there are secrets about a bit of wire which has been studied for the past 150 years, yet to be discovered. Also, double blind testing showing that no one can tell one cable apart from another.

Why should anyone be sceptical about established facts just because someone believes a cable sounds different, despite that they cannot, under controlled conditions, tell one bit of wire from another.

Regards,

Shadders.

You are inferring that since scientists do not know the specifics with regards to dark energy and dark matter - Yes I am.

that all current scientific advances which provide every technological device, or other, is therefore invalid. - Ermmm... I don't think I said that bit. Why did you suggest I did?

that there are secrets about a bit of wire which has been studied for the past 150 years, yet to be discovered. - I am suggesting that this may be a possibility.

Also, double blind testing showing that no one can tell one cable apart from another. - I gave my views on double blind testing earlier in this thread. They are designed to confuse and there are too many variables in music which is made up of multiple tones at multiple amplitudes, interspersed with varying intervals of (more or less) silence, all constantly changing. Too much for the human mind to decipher under duress. The single blind "Pepsi Challenge" I do however consider to be valid.

Hi,

You are picking and choosing scientific methods, and denying others, all of which are very well established, to support your statement that you can hear differences in cables.

I did state you were inferring, not that you stated explicitly.

Double blind testing is not designed to confuse, far from it, it is designed to stop expectation bias etc. It proves that people cannot tell one bit of wire from another.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

[shadders]

Shadders you appear a very logical person that why I brought it up in the first place

I assumed A logical person if they was doing a test would either not do it at all or do it methodically and worthwhile.

So select 5 examples that cover different options - copper, silver, solid, stranded, screened not screened and try them all. Or 5 differnet 5 star magazine review cables or 5 different manufacturers or 5 different price points - a selection

Then after testing them maybe add another variable i.e. put better speaker cable in the system and do the 5 tests again.

Just to make sure the result wasnt being influenced or skewed because of one factor. Then a logical methodical person would pat themself on the back and say fair play that was a comprehensive test.

That is why I mentioned acoustics because the cable you tried was in my mind clearly terrible, price is irrelevant it was clearly terrible or maybe it might have made a small difference but the effect of the room on the sound was greater than the effect of 1 cable on the system (another reason I suggested trying a full loom).

I can think of a very apt example - the Kef Muo system at the hifi deluxe show - all serious Chord Electronics equiipment Multi Award winning Dave Dac all wonderfully engineered boxes, a serious system and it sounded like "a school disco" to use Gazzip words. Why was that - it was the room it was in having that much effect on the sound of the system even one that good sounded that bad.

I doubt I would have heard any difference changing 1 phono cable in that system either. I am not trying to start arguing but surely you can see where I am on this?

Hi,

You have stated I should test 5 different cables - what will this prove?

The fact that I tested just one expensive cable, and found no difference, is sufficient. Whatever the system is, as long as it has a reasonable specification, the change if it exists, will be heard.

What do think is in these cables? They are just a bit of wire.

The cable websites do not include any scientific proof that their cable will produce a specific sound. They all contain marketing pseudoscience statements.

If there was any actual scientific fact that the company could present to state that their cable WILL provide a better sound, they will have presented it, and all the scientists could peer review, repeat, confirm, and it would then become established fact.

Don't you think it strange, that all they do have is pseudoscientific statements?

You cannot state, I have not done the testing right, or my system is insufficient, or the room is insufficient, just because I got the wrong result.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

[shadders]

Hi,

You are inferring that since scientists do not know the specifics with regards to dark energy and dark matter, that all current scientific advances which provide every technological device, or other, is therefore invalid. in addition that there are secrets about a bit of wire which has been studied for the past 150 years, yet to be discovered. Also, double blind testing showing that no one can tell one cable apart from another.

Why should anyone be sceptical about established facts just because someone believes a cable sounds different, despite that they cannot, under controlled conditions, tell one bit of wire from another.

Regards,

Shadders.

You are inferring that since scientists do not know the specifics with regards to dark energy and dark matter - Yes I am.

that all current scientific advances which provide every technological device, or other, is therefore invalid. - Ermmm... I don't think I said that bit. Why did you suggest I did?

that there are secrets about a bit of wire which has been studied for the past 150 years, yet to be discovered. - I am suggesting that this may be a possibility.

Also, double blind testing showing that no one can tell one cable apart from another. - I gave my views on double blind testing earlier in this thread. They are designed to confuse and there are too many variables in music which is made up of multiple tones at multiple amplitudes, interspersed with varying intervals of (more or less) silence, all constantly changing. Too much for the human mind to decipher under duress. The single blind "Pepsi Challenge" I do however consider to be valid.

Hi,

You are picking and choosing scientific methods, and denying others, all of which are very well established, to support your statement that you can hear differences in cables.

I did state you were inferring, not that you stated explicitly.

Double blind testing is not designed to confuse, far from it, it is designed to stop expectation bias etc. It proves that people cannot tell one bit of wire from another.

Regards,

Shadders.

I understand why double blind exists as a methodology. It is because there is a distinct danger that the person running the test may subconsciously draw attention to one product over another. This is the major reason why market research companies generally prefer to use computers, and double blind experiments, for gathering important data. This potential pitfall is not however relevant in a hifi listening test because no human interaction between tester and test subject is required. What is wrong with a switch, controlled by the listener, which throws between two different cables, or two the same for that matter if you want to throw in a placebo for good measure? Why does the test need to be double blind when single blind is also considered to be scientifically valid?

Hi,

I think you have answered it - the person running the test changing cables may give away what is being tested. If the listener controlled the switch..... I assume you mean a button that must provide a random selection, could be an answer. Are there not computer controlled DBT?

Regards,

Shadders.

 

[ellisdj]

Shadders you appear a very logical person that why I brought it up in the first place

I assumed A logical person if they was doing a test would either not do it at all or do it methodically and worthwhile.

So select 5 examples that cover different options - copper, silver, solid, stranded, screened not screened and try them all. Or 5 differnet 5 star magazine review cables or 5 different manufacturers or 5 different price points - a selection

Then after testing them maybe add another variable i.e. put better speaker cable in the system and do the 5 tests again.

Just to make sure the result wasnt being influenced or skewed because of one factor. Then a logical methodical person would pat themself on the back and say fair play that was a comprehensive test.

That is why I mentioned acoustics because the cable you tried was in my mind clearly terrible, price is irrelevant it was clearly terrible or maybe it might have made a small difference but the effect of the room on the sound was greater than the effect of 1 cable on the system (another reason I suggested trying a full loom).

I can think of a very apt example - the Kef Muo system at the hifi deluxe show - all serious Chord Electronics equiipment Multi Award winning Dave Dac all wonderfully engineered boxes, a serious system and it sounded like "a school disco" to use Gazzip words. Why was that - it was the room it was in having that much effect on the sound of the system even one that good sounded that bad.

I doubt I would have heard any difference changing 1 phono cable in that system either. I am not trying to start arguing but surely you can see where I am on this?

Hi,

You have stated I should test 5 different cables - what will this prove?

The fact that I tested just one expensive cable, and found no difference, is sufficient. Whatever the system is, as long as it has a reasonable specification, the change if it exists, will be heard.

What do think is in these cables? They are just a bit of wire.

The cable websites do not include any scientific proof that their cable will produce a specific sound. They all contain marketing pseudoscience statements.

If there was any actual scientific fact that the company could present to state that their cable WILL provide a better sound, they will have presented it, and all the scientists could peer review, repeat, confirm, and it would then become established fact.

Don't you think it strange, that all they do have is pseudoscientific statements?

You cannot state, I have not done the testing right, or my system is insufficient, or the room is insufficient, just because I got the wrong result.

Regards,

Shadders.

I am just glad you are not behind trying to find the cure for cancer doing that sort of limited testing lol

I cant believe you have not held your hands up at least and said yes I could and probably should have tested more as it would have been a more comprehensive test I can look back on and say I did properly. A man with your mindset logical as I say - it appears a mindset very set in its ways though from here - cant even admit to doing that wrong.

You must also admit that £25 then or £75 in todays money is not expensive - that does not buy you a high end cable - it buys you a bargain basement bottom of the range only . So you didnt test a high end cable, you likely tested bell wire in a pvc sleeve and it sounded no different to your bell wire bog standard cable.

Hence testing the selection - covereing everything that even just pure curiosity might throw out. Would silver with a higher conductivity than copper sound different - that seems a logical test for an intelligent person to want to try.

 

[Gazzip]

Hi,

You are inferring that since scientists do not know the specifics with regards to dark energy and dark matter, that all current scientific advances which provide every technological device, or other, is therefore invalid. in addition that there are secrets about a bit of wire which has been studied for the past 150 years, yet to be discovered. Also, double blind testing showing that no one can tell one cable apart from another.

Why should anyone be sceptical about established facts just because someone believes a cable sounds different, despite that they cannot, under controlled conditions, tell one bit of wire from another.

Regards,

Shadders.

You are inferring that since scientists do not know the specifics with regards to dark energy and dark matter - Yes I am.

that all current scientific advances which provide every technological device, or other, is therefore invalid. - Ermmm... I don't think I said that bit. Why did you suggest I did?

that there are secrets about a bit of wire which has been studied for the past 150 years, yet to be discovered. - I am suggesting that this may be a possibility.

Also, double blind testing showing that no one can tell one cable apart from another. - I gave my views on double blind testing earlier in this thread. They are designed to confuse and there are too many variables in music which is made up of multiple tones at multiple amplitudes, interspersed with varying intervals of (more or less) silence, all constantly changing. Too much for the human mind to decipher under duress. The single blind "Pepsi Challenge" I do however consider to be valid.

Hi,

You are picking and choosing scientific methods, and denying others, all of which are very well established, to support your statement that you can hear differences in cables.

I did state you were inferring, not that you stated explicitly.

Double blind testing is not designed to confuse, far from it, it is designed to stop expectation bias etc. It proves that people cannot tell one bit of wire from another.

Regards,

Shadders.

I understand why double blind exists as a methodology. It is because there is a distinct danger that the person running the test may subconsciously draw attention to one product over another. This is the major reason why market research companies generally prefer to use computers, and double blind experiments, for gathering important data. This potential pitfall is not however relevant in a hifi listening test because no human interaction between tester and test subject is required. What is wrong with a switch, controlled by the listener, which throws between two different cables, or two the same for that matter if you want to throw in a placebo for good measure? Why does the test need to be double blind when single blind is also considered to be scientifically valid?

EDIT: I have read that double blind is designed to prevent observation bias, but I have no idea why it would prevent expectation bias any more or less than single blind. I think you may have your knickers in a twist there.

 

[shadders]

Hi,

You are inferring that since scientists do not know the specifics with regards to dark energy and dark matter, that all current scientific advances which provide every technological device, or other, is therefore invalid. in addition that there are secrets about a bit of wire which has been studied for the past 150 years, yet to be discovered. Also, double blind testing showing that no one can tell one cable apart from another.

Why should anyone be sceptical about established facts just because someone believes a cable sounds different, despite that they cannot, under controlled conditions, tell one bit of wire from another.

Regards,

Shadders.

You are inferring that since scientists do not know the specifics with regards to dark energy and dark matter - Yes I am.

that all current scientific advances which provide every technological device, or other, is therefore invalid. - Ermmm... I don't think I said that bit. Why did you suggest I did?

that there are secrets about a bit of wire which has been studied for the past 150 years, yet to be discovered. - I am suggesting that this may be a possibility.

Also, double blind testing showing that no one can tell one cable apart from another. - I gave my views on double blind testing earlier in this thread. They are designed to confuse and there are too many variables in music which is made up of multiple tones at multiple amplitudes, interspersed with varying intervals of (more or less) silence, all constantly changing. Too much for the human mind to decipher under duress. The single blind "Pepsi Challenge" I do however consider to be valid.

Hi,

You are picking and choosing scientific methods, and denying others, all of which are very well established, to support your statement that you can hear differences in cables.

I did state you were inferring, not that you stated explicitly.

Double blind testing is not designed to confuse, far from it, it is designed to stop expectation bias etc. It proves that people cannot tell one bit of wire from another.

Regards,

Shadders.

I understand why double blind exists as a methodology. It is because there is a distinct danger that the person running the test may subconsciously draw attention to one product over another. This is the major reason why market research companies generally prefer to use computers, and double blind experiments, for gathering important data. This potential pitfall is not however relevant in a hifi listening test because no human interaction between tester and test subject is required. What is wrong with a switch, controlled by the listener, which throws between two different cables, or two the same for that matter if you want to throw in a placebo for good measure? Why does the test need to be double blind when single blind is also considered to be scientifically valid?

EDIT: I have read that double blind is designed to prevent observation bias, but I have no idea why it would prevent expectation bias any more or less than single blind. I think you may have your knickers in a twist there.

Hi,

Ok, wrong word, though I did add etc., as it was a general statement. You knew what I meant.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

[muljao]

Lets get back on track.Good hifi for me is a system that keeps me enjoying the music. I could add that spotify makes good hifi in that it gives me almost unlimited listening options.

 

[shadders]

Shadders you appear a very logical person that why I brought it up in the first place

I assumed A logical person if they was doing a test would either not do it at all or do it methodically and worthwhile.

So select 5 examples that cover different options - copper, silver, solid, stranded, screened not screened and try them all. Or 5 differnet 5 star magazine review cables or 5 different manufacturers or 5 different price points - a selection

Then after testing them maybe add another variable i.e. put better speaker cable in the system and do the 5 tests again.

Just to make sure the result wasnt being influenced or skewed because of one factor. Then a logical methodical person would pat themself on the back and say fair play that was a comprehensive test.

That is why I mentioned acoustics because the cable you tried was in my mind clearly terrible, price is irrelevant it was clearly terrible or maybe it might have made a small difference but the effect of the room on the sound was greater than the effect of 1 cable on the system (another reason I suggested trying a full loom).

I can think of a very apt example - the Kef Muo system at the hifi deluxe show - all serious Chord Electronics equiipment Multi Award winning Dave Dac all wonderfully engineered boxes, a serious system and it sounded like "a school disco" to use Gazzip words. Why was that - it was the room it was in having that much effect on the sound of the system even one that good sounded that bad.

I doubt I would have heard any difference changing 1 phono cable in that system either. I am not trying to start arguing but surely you can see where I am on this?

Hi,

You have stated I should test 5 different cables - what will this prove?

The fact that I tested just one expensive cable, and found no difference, is sufficient. Whatever the system is, as long as it has a reasonable specification, the change if it exists, will be heard.

What do think is in these cables? They are just a bit of wire.

The cable websites do not include any scientific proof that their cable will produce a specific sound. They all contain marketing pseudoscience statements.

If there was any actual scientific fact that the company could present to state that their cable WILL provide a better sound, they will have presented it, and all the scientists could peer review, repeat, confirm, and it would then become established fact.

Don't you think it strange, that all they do have is pseudoscientific statements?

You cannot state, I have not done the testing right, or my system is insufficient, or the room is insufficient, just because I got the wrong result.

Regards,

Shadders.

I am just glad you are not behind trying to find the cure for cancer doing that sort of limited testing lol

I cant believe you have not held your hands up at least and said yes I could and probably should have tested more as it would have been a more comprehensive test I can look back on and say I did properly. A man with your mindset logical as I say - it appears a mindset very set in its ways though from here - cant even admit to doing that wrong.

You must also admit that £25 then or £75 in todays money is not expensive - that does not buy you a high end cable - it buys you a bargain basement bottom of the range only . So you didnt test a high end cable, you likely tested bell wire in a pvc sleeve and it sounded no different to your bell wire bog standard cable.

Hence testing the selection - covereing everything that even just pure curiosity might throw out. Would silver with a higher conductivity than copper sound different - that seems a logical test for an intelligent person to want to try.

Hi,

Any testing is valid if two examples are the only choices. That is what they do with cancer drug trials, one group has the drug to be tested, the other group has the placebo which a zero effect on the cancer.

You persist in stating I did it wrong because it did not meet your expected result.

You persist in expecting expensive cables to provide a better sound.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

[Gazzip]

Shadders you appear a very logical person that why I brought it up in the first place

I assumed A logical person if they was doing a test would either not do it at all or do it methodically and worthwhile.

So select 5 examples that cover different options - copper, silver, solid, stranded, screened not screened and try them all. Or 5 differnet 5 star magazine review cables or 5 different manufacturers or 5 different price points - a selection

Then after testing them maybe add another variable i.e. put better speaker cable in the system and do the 5 tests again.

Just to make sure the result wasnt being influenced or skewed because of one factor. Then a logical methodical person would pat themself on the back and say fair play that was a comprehensive test.

That is why I mentioned acoustics because the cable you tried was in my mind clearly terrible, price is irrelevant it was clearly terrible or maybe it might have made a small difference but the effect of the room on the sound was greater than the effect of 1 cable on the system (another reason I suggested trying a full loom).

I can think of a very apt example - the Kef Muo system at the hifi deluxe show - all serious Chord Electronics equiipment Multi Award winning Dave Dac all wonderfully engineered boxes, a serious system and it sounded like "a school disco" to use Gazzip words. Why was that - it was the room it was in having that much effect on the sound of the system even one that good sounded that bad.

I doubt I would have heard any difference changing 1 phono cable in that system either. I am not trying to start arguing but surely you can see where I am on this?

Hi,

You have stated I should test 5 different cables - what will this prove?

The fact that I tested just one expensive cable, and found no difference, is sufficient. Whatever the system is, as long as it has a reasonable specification, the change if it exists, will be heard.

What do think is in these cables? They are just a bit of wire.

The cable websites do not include any scientific proof that their cable will produce a specific sound. They all contain marketing pseudoscience statements.

If there was any actual scientific fact that the company could present to state that their cable WILL provide a better sound, they will have presented it, and all the scientists could peer review, repeat, confirm, and it would then become established fact.

Don't you think it strange, that all they do have is pseudoscientific statements?

You cannot state, I have not done the testing right, or my system is insufficient, or the room is insufficient, just because I got the wrong result.

Regards,

Shadders.

I am just glad you are not behind trying to find the cure for cancer doing that sort of limited testing lol

I cant believe you have not held your hands up at least and said yes I could and probably should have tested more as it would have been a more comprehensive test I can look back on and say I did properly. A man with your mindset logical as I say - it appears a mindset very set in its ways though from here - cant even admit to doing that wrong.

You must also admit that £25 then or £75 in todays money is not expensive - that does not buy you a high end cable - it buys you a bargain basement bottom of the range only . So you didnt test a high end cable, you likely tested bell wire in a pvc sleeve and it sounded no different to your bell wire bog standard cable.

Hence testing the selection - covereing everything that even just pure curiosity might throw out. Would silver with a higher conductivity than copper sound different - that seems a logical test for an intelligent person to want to try.

Hi,

Any testing is valid if two examples are the only choices. That is what they do with cancer drug trials, one group has the drug to be tested, the other group has the placebo which a zero effect on the cancer.

You persist in stating I did it wrong because it did not meet your expected result.

You persist in expecting expensive cables to provide a better sound.

Regards,

Shadders.

Yes but there's the rub Shadders. Expectation bias can only work one way can it not, but there are many examples on this hifi forum and others where this has not happened. I myself purchased some Tellerium Q black speaker cables a couple of years ago. They cost me a few hundred pounds so I was obviously biased for them to provide the expected improvement. Problem is that I hated them. I tried to like them, I really did, but the sound just flattened out and did not work for me. An expectation for improvement but a realisation that degradation has occurred just does not fit the expectation bias model.

 

[shadders]

Shadders you appear a very logical person that why I brought it up in the first place

I assumed A logical person if they was doing a test would either not do it at all or do it methodically and worthwhile.

So select 5 examples that cover different options - copper, silver, solid, stranded, screened not screened and try them all. Or 5 differnet 5 star magazine review cables or 5 different manufacturers or 5 different price points - a selection

Then after testing them maybe add another variable i.e. put better speaker cable in the system and do the 5 tests again.

Just to make sure the result wasnt being influenced or skewed because of one factor. Then a logical methodical person would pat themself on the back and say fair play that was a comprehensive test.

That is why I mentioned acoustics because the cable you tried was in my mind clearly terrible, price is irrelevant it was clearly terrible or maybe it might have made a small difference but the effect of the room on the sound was greater than the effect of 1 cable on the system (another reason I suggested trying a full loom).

I can think of a very apt example - the Kef Muo system at the hifi deluxe show - all serious Chord Electronics equiipment Multi Award winning Dave Dac all wonderfully engineered boxes, a serious system and it sounded like "a school disco" to use Gazzip words. Why was that - it was the room it was in having that much effect on the sound of the system even one that good sounded that bad.

I doubt I would have heard any difference changing 1 phono cable in that system either. I am not trying to start arguing but surely you can see where I am on this?

Hi,

You have stated I should test 5 different cables - what will this prove?

The fact that I tested just one expensive cable, and found no difference, is sufficient. Whatever the system is, as long as it has a reasonable specification, the change if it exists, will be heard.

What do think is in these cables? They are just a bit of wire.

The cable websites do not include any scientific proof that their cable will produce a specific sound. They all contain marketing pseudoscience statements.

If there was any actual scientific fact that the company could present to state that their cable WILL provide a better sound, they will have presented it, and all the scientists could peer review, repeat, confirm, and it would then become established fact.

Don't you think it strange, that all they do have is pseudoscientific statements?

You cannot state, I have not done the testing right, or my system is insufficient, or the room is insufficient, just because I got the wrong result.

Regards,

Shadders.

I am just glad you are not behind trying to find the cure for cancer doing that sort of limited testing lol

I cant believe you have not held your hands up at least and said yes I could and probably should have tested more as it would have been a more comprehensive test I can look back on and say I did properly. A man with your mindset logical as I say - it appears a mindset very set in its ways though from here - cant even admit to doing that wrong.

You must also admit that £25 then or £75 in todays money is not expensive - that does not buy you a high end cable - it buys you a bargain basement bottom of the range only . So you didnt test a high end cable, you likely tested bell wire in a pvc sleeve and it sounded no different to your bell wire bog standard cable.

Hence testing the selection - covereing everything that even just pure curiosity might throw out. Would silver with a higher conductivity than copper sound different - that seems a logical test for an intelligent person to want to try.

Hi,

Any testing is valid if two examples are the only choices. That is what they do with cancer drug trials, one group has the drug to be tested, the other group has the placebo which a zero effect on the cancer.

You persist in stating I did it wrong because it did not meet your expected result.

You persist in expecting expensive cables to provide a better sound.

Regards,

Shadders.

Yes but there's the rub Shadders. Expectation bias can only work one way can it not, but there are many examples on this hifi forum and others where this has not happened. I myself purchased some Tellerium Q black speaker cables a couple of years ago. They cost me a few hundred pounds so I was obviously biased for them to provide the expected improvement. Problem is that I hated them. I tried to like them, I really did, but the sound just flattened out and did not work for me. An expectation for improvement but a realisation that degradation has occurred just does not fit the expectation bias model.

Hi,

Or alternatively, your expectation was too high given their cost, and they sounded no different, which resulted in disappointment, which translates into you not liking them.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

[Gazzip]

Shadders you appear a very logical person that why I brought it up in the first place

I assumed A logical person if they was doing a test would either not do it at all or do it methodically and worthwhile.

So select 5 examples that cover different options - copper, silver, solid, stranded, screened not screened and try them all. Or 5 differnet 5 star magazine review cables or 5 different manufacturers or 5 different price points - a selection

Then after testing them maybe add another variable i.e. put better speaker cable in the system and do the 5 tests again.

Just to make sure the result wasnt being influenced or skewed because of one factor. Then a logical methodical person would pat themself on the back and say fair play that was a comprehensive test.

That is why I mentioned acoustics because the cable you tried was in my mind clearly terrible, price is irrelevant it was clearly terrible or maybe it might have made a small difference but the effect of the room on the sound was greater than the effect of 1 cable on the system (another reason I suggested trying a full loom).

I can think of a very apt example - the Kef Muo system at the hifi deluxe show - all serious Chord Electronics equiipment Multi Award winning Dave Dac all wonderfully engineered boxes, a serious system and it sounded like "a school disco" to use Gazzip words. Why was that - it was the room it was in having that much effect on the sound of the system even one that good sounded that bad.

I doubt I would have heard any difference changing 1 phono cable in that system either. I am not trying to start arguing but surely you can see where I am on this?

Hi,

You have stated I should test 5 different cables - what will this prove?

The fact that I tested just one expensive cable, and found no difference, is sufficient. Whatever the system is, as long as it has a reasonable specification, the change if it exists, will be heard.

What do think is in these cables? They are just a bit of wire.

The cable websites do not include any scientific proof that their cable will produce a specific sound. They all contain marketing pseudoscience statements.

If there was any actual scientific fact that the company could present to state that their cable WILL provide a better sound, they will have presented it, and all the scientists could peer review, repeat, confirm, and it would then become established fact.

Don't you think it strange, that all they do have is pseudoscientific statements?

You cannot state, I have not done the testing right, or my system is insufficient, or the room is insufficient, just because I got the wrong result.

Regards,

Shadders.

I am just glad you are not behind trying to find the cure for cancer doing that sort of limited testing lol

I cant believe you have not held your hands up at least and said yes I could and probably should have tested more as it would have been a more comprehensive test I can look back on and say I did properly. A man with your mindset logical as I say - it appears a mindset very set in its ways though from here - cant even admit to doing that wrong.

You must also admit that £25 then or £75 in todays money is not expensive - that does not buy you a high end cable - it buys you a bargain basement bottom of the range only . So you didnt test a high end cable, you likely tested bell wire in a pvc sleeve and it sounded no different to your bell wire bog standard cable.

Hence testing the selection - covereing everything that even just pure curiosity might throw out. Would silver with a higher conductivity than copper sound different - that seems a logical test for an intelligent person to want to try.

Hi,

Any testing is valid if two examples are the only choices. That is what they do with cancer drug trials, one group has the drug to be tested, the other group has the placebo which a zero effect on the cancer.

You persist in stating I did it wrong because it did not meet your expected result.

You persist in expecting expensive cables to provide a better sound.

Regards,

Shadders.

Yes but there's the rub Shadders. Expectation bias can only work one way can it not, but there are many examples on this hifi forum and others where this has not happened. I myself purchased some Tellerium Q black speaker cables a couple of years ago. They cost me a few hundred pounds so I was obviously biased for them to provide the expected improvement. Problem is that I hated them. I tried to like them, I really did, but the sound just flattened out and did not work for me. An expectation for improvement but a realisation that degradation has occurred just does not fit the expectation bias model.

Hi,

Or alternatively, your expectation was too high given their cost, and they sounded no different, which resulted in disappointment, which translates into you not liking them.

Regards,

Shadders.

Or alternatively they sounded different from my reference and I didn't like that difference. I had a similar experience when I purchased a fake XLO cable early last year... At that point I decided to stop fecking around with cables and to concentrate on the electronics. Accordingly I installed VanDamme blue and VanDamme interconnects as a permanent reference.

 

[ellisdj]

Gazzip giving up on xlo thats a big mistake. I have tried out lots and lots nothing affects a system like xlo. See what you think of the isolator and see if you think i know what i am on about after that. Revisit when you have the motivation back and it will come back

Shadders give over with the trying to save face answers always twisting it. I am trying to have a converstion with you man not an arguement. Yout still stand by what you did as being enough but deep down you know that is not true nothing to do with the result. They might test 2 drug samples at once but they dont only do 1 test full stop.

 

[shadders]

Shadders you appear a very logical person that why I brought it up in the first place

I assumed A logical person if they was doing a test would either not do it at all or do it methodically and worthwhile.

So select 5 examples that cover different options - copper, silver, solid, stranded, screened not screened and try them all. Or 5 differnet 5 star magazine review cables or 5 different manufacturers or 5 different price points - a selection

Then after testing them maybe add another variable i.e. put better speaker cable in the system and do the 5 tests again.

Just to make sure the result wasnt being influenced or skewed because of one factor. Then a logical methodical person would pat themself on the back and say fair play that was a comprehensive test.

That is why I mentioned acoustics because the cable you tried was in my mind clearly terrible, price is irrelevant it was clearly terrible or maybe it might have made a small difference but the effect of the room on the sound was greater than the effect of 1 cable on the system (another reason I suggested trying a full loom).

I can think of a very apt example - the Kef Muo system at the hifi deluxe show - all serious Chord Electronics equiipment Multi Award winning Dave Dac all wonderfully engineered boxes, a serious system and it sounded like "a school disco" to use Gazzip words. Why was that - it was the room it was in having that much effect on the sound of the system even one that good sounded that bad.

I doubt I would have heard any difference changing 1 phono cable in that system either. I am not trying to start arguing but surely you can see where I am on this?

Hi,

You have stated I should test 5 different cables - what will this prove?

The fact that I tested just one expensive cable, and found no difference, is sufficient. Whatever the system is, as long as it has a reasonable specification, the change if it exists, will be heard.

What do think is in these cables? They are just a bit of wire.

The cable websites do not include any scientific proof that their cable will produce a specific sound. They all contain marketing pseudoscience statements.

If there was any actual scientific fact that the company could present to state that their cable WILL provide a better sound, they will have presented it, and all the scientists could peer review, repeat, confirm, and it would then become established fact.

Don't you think it strange, that all they do have is pseudoscientific statements?

You cannot state, I have not done the testing right, or my system is insufficient, or the room is insufficient, just because I got the wrong result.

Regards,

Shadders.

I am just glad you are not behind trying to find the cure for cancer doing that sort of limited testing lol

I cant believe you have not held your hands up at least and said yes I could and probably should have tested more as it would have been a more comprehensive test I can look back on and say I did properly. A man with your mindset logical as I say - it appears a mindset very set in its ways though from here - cant even admit to doing that wrong.

You must also admit that £25 then or £75 in todays money is not expensive - that does not buy you a high end cable - it buys you a bargain basement bottom of the range only . So you didnt test a high end cable, you likely tested bell wire in a pvc sleeve and it sounded no different to your bell wire bog standard cable.

Hence testing the selection - covereing everything that even just pure curiosity might throw out. Would silver with a higher conductivity than copper sound different - that seems a logical test for an intelligent person to want to try.

Hi,

Any testing is valid if two examples are the only choices. That is what they do with cancer drug trials, one group has the drug to be tested, the other group has the placebo which a zero effect on the cancer.

You persist in stating I did it wrong because it did not meet your expected result.

You persist in expecting expensive cables to provide a better sound.

Regards,

Shadders.

Yes but there's the rub Shadders. Expectation bias can only work one way can it not, but there are many examples on this hifi forum and others where this has not happened. I myself purchased some Tellerium Q black speaker cables a couple of years ago. They cost me a few hundred pounds so I was obviously biased for them to provide the expected improvement. Problem is that I hated them. I tried to like them, I really did, but the sound just flattened out and did not work for me. An expectation for improvement but a realisation that degradation has occurred just does not fit the expectation bias model.

Hi,

Or alternatively, your expectation was too high given their cost, and they sounded no different, which resulted in disappointment, which translates into you not liking them.

Regards,

Shadders.

Or alternatively they sounded different from my reference and I didn't like that difference. I had a similar experience when I purchased a fake XLO cable early last year... At that point I decided to stop fecking around with cables and to concentrate on the electronics. Accordingly I installed VanDamme blue and VanDamme interconnects as a permanent reference.

Hi,

This could be resolved with DBT.

For those people who state that they experience a change in sound when they change a cable, why don't they go through a DBT rather than trying to convince others, that whatever they have done is wrong since it did not give the "correct" results.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

[shadders]

Gazzip giving up on xlo thats a big mistake. I have tried out lots and lots nothing affects a system like xlo. See what you think of the isolator and see if you think i know what i am on about after that. Revisit when you have the motivation back and it will come back

Shadders give over with the trying to save face answers always twisting it. I am trying to have a converstion with you man not an arguement. Yout still stand by what you did as being enough but deep down you know that is not true nothing to do with the result. They might test 2 drug samples at once but they dont only do 1 test full stop.

Hi,

This is not about saving face, and I am not twisting anything. Everything I have stated is based on fact. Please provide the examples where i have twisted something.

You have been rude, demeaning, and denigrating, but I have not complained. Someone else has complained about your responses, you then complained about them.

You latest statement is that I only tested one cable, and your reference was that they test the same single drug on many people.

In this regard, it is about whether the drug has an effect on the person. For testing cables, you generally test two, else the person undergoing the tests has too many choices. Are you stating that DBT must use more than two test products/cables else it is invalid?

The most important point : -

You state that you change a cable and hear a difference. Other people change a cable and hear a difference, and you ACCEPT this. I change a cable, and because the result is not what you WANT it to be, I have done it wrong, or the test was wrong

You cannot state that everyone who BELIEVES that cables make a difference will be correct, and ANYONE who does not BELIEVE that cables make a difference, are incorrect in their results/methodolgy.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

[Gazzip]

Shadders you appear a very logical person that why I brought it up in the first place

I assumed A logical person if they was doing a test would either not do it at all or do it methodically and worthwhile.

So select 5 examples that cover different options - copper, silver, solid, stranded, screened not screened and try them all. Or 5 differnet 5 star magazine review cables or 5 different manufacturers or 5 different price points - a selection

Then after testing them maybe add another variable i.e. put better speaker cable in the system and do the 5 tests again.

Just to make sure the result wasnt being influenced or skewed because of one factor. Then a logical methodical person would pat themself on the back and say fair play that was a comprehensive test.

That is why I mentioned acoustics because the cable you tried was in my mind clearly terrible, price is irrelevant it was clearly terrible or maybe it might have made a small difference but the effect of the room on the sound was greater than the effect of 1 cable on the system (another reason I suggested trying a full loom).

I can think of a very apt example - the Kef Muo system at the hifi deluxe show - all serious Chord Electronics equiipment Multi Award winning Dave Dac all wonderfully engineered boxes, a serious system and it sounded like "a school disco" to use Gazzip words. Why was that - it was the room it was in having that much effect on the sound of the system even one that good sounded that bad.

I doubt I would have heard any difference changing 1 phono cable in that system either. I am not trying to start arguing but surely you can see where I am on this?

Hi,

You have stated I should test 5 different cables - what will this prove?

The fact that I tested just one expensive cable, and found no difference, is sufficient. Whatever the system is, as long as it has a reasonable specification, the change if it exists, will be heard.

What do think is in these cables? They are just a bit of wire.

The cable websites do not include any scientific proof that their cable will produce a specific sound. They all contain marketing pseudoscience statements.

If there was any actual scientific fact that the company could present to state that their cable WILL provide a better sound, they will have presented it, and all the scientists could peer review, repeat, confirm, and it would then become established fact.

Don't you think it strange, that all they do have is pseudoscientific statements?

You cannot state, I have not done the testing right, or my system is insufficient, or the room is insufficient, just because I got the wrong result.

Regards,

Shadders.

I am just glad you are not behind trying to find the cure for cancer doing that sort of limited testing lol

I cant believe you have not held your hands up at least and said yes I could and probably should have tested more as it would have been a more comprehensive test I can look back on and say I did properly. A man with your mindset logical as I say - it appears a mindset very set in its ways though from here - cant even admit to doing that wrong.

You must also admit that £25 then or £75 in todays money is not expensive - that does not buy you a high end cable - it buys you a bargain basement bottom of the range only . So you didnt test a high end cable, you likely tested bell wire in a pvc sleeve and it sounded no different to your bell wire bog standard cable.

Hence testing the selection - covereing everything that even just pure curiosity might throw out. Would silver with a higher conductivity than copper sound different - that seems a logical test for an intelligent person to want to try.

Hi,

Any testing is valid if two examples are the only choices. That is what they do with cancer drug trials, one group has the drug to be tested, the other group has the placebo which a zero effect on the cancer.

You persist in stating I did it wrong because it did not meet your expected result.

You persist in expecting expensive cables to provide a better sound.

Regards,

Shadders.

Yes but there's the rub Shadders. Expectation bias can only work one way can it not, but there are many examples on this hifi forum and others where this has not happened. I myself purchased some Tellerium Q black speaker cables a couple of years ago. They cost me a few hundred pounds so I was obviously biased for them to provide the expected improvement. Problem is that I hated them. I tried to like them, I really did, but the sound just flattened out and did not work for me. An expectation for improvement but a realisation that degradation has occurred just does not fit the expectation bias model.

Hi,

Or alternatively, your expectation was too high given their cost, and they sounded no different, which resulted in disappointment, which translates into you not liking them.

Regards,

Shadders.

Or alternatively they sounded different from my reference and I didn't like that difference. I had a similar experience when I purchased a fake XLO cable early last year... At that point I decided to stop fecking around with cables and to concentrate on the electronics. Accordingly I installed VanDamme blue and VanDamme interconnects as a permanent reference.

Hi,

This could be resolved with DBT.

For those people who state that they experience a change in sound when they change a cable, why don't they go through a DBT rather than trying to convince others, that whatever they have done is wrong since it did not give the "correct" results.

Regards,

Shadders.

...because DBT is bollox for sensory testing, in accordance with my reasons as previously stated.

 

[luckylion100]

to you should be... taken from elsewhere on the site.

http://www.whathifi.com/forum/turntables-and-lps/cracked-it

Personally regarding the state of this thread I think someone should quit whilst he's 'behind' (don't think the individual realises it though) it's only going to get worse...

 

[Gazzip]

Shadders, please give this a read. You need to project beyond the medical bent of the article, but I am sure you will see the point I am trying to make in relation to DBT. You have got me parroting somebody else's ideas now, you bad man (or woman, as I don't know you)...

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/looking-in-the-cultural-mirror/201011/the-trouble-double-blind-placebo-studies

 

[Gazzip]

.

 

[ellisdj]

Gazzip giving up on xlo thats a big mistake. I have tried out lots and lots nothing affects a system like xlo. See what you think of the isolator and see if you think i know what i am on about after that. Revisit when you have the motivation back and it will come back

Shadders give over with the trying to save face answers always twisting it. I am trying to have a converstion with you man not an arguement. Yout still stand by what you did as being enough but deep down you know that is not true nothing to do with the result. They might test 2 drug samples at once but they dont only do 1 test full stop.

Hi,

This is not about saving face, and I am not twisting anything. Everything I have stated is based on fact. Please provide the examples where i have twisted something.

You have been rude, demeaning, and denigrating, but I have not complained. Someone else has complained about your responses, you then complained about them.

You latest statement is that I only tested one cable, and your reference was that they test the same single drug on many people.

In this regard, it is about whether the drug has an effect on the person. For testing cables, you generally test two, else the person undergoing the tests has too many choices. Are you stating that DBT must use more than two test products/cables else it is invalid?

The most important point : -

You state that you change a cable and hear a difference. Other people change a cable and hear a difference, and you ACCEPT this. I change a cable, and because the result is not what you WANT it to be, I have done it wrong, or the test was wrong

You cannot state that everyone who BELIEVES that cables make a difference will be correct, and ANYONE who does not BELIEVE that cables make a difference,  are incorrect in their results/methodolgy.

Regards,

Shadders.

Laughing -If that is not a saving face post i dont know what is... come on shadders you dont ever let up and ease off. I dont care what you think about cables but i was testing your personality and you are being very defensive over this. No need to be holds hands say yes i could have tested more that would have been a better test. But you cant budge even slightly for some reason you just twist it back dude. Stubborn man.

I wasnt complaining about Chebby i was making a joke of the situation because really that is what is was. My whole response was meant to be sarcastic hopefully someone found it funny anyway.
People are wound up so tight about hifi and science on this forum. I think this thread shows that at least

I had to go down the police station earlier to give a statement on the recent murder of science

 

[shadders]

Shadders, please give this a read. You need to project beyond the medical bent of the article, but I am sure you will see the point I am trying to make in relation to DBT. You have got me parroting somebody else's ideas now, you bad man (or woman, as I don't know you)...

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/looking-in-the-cultural-mirror/201011/the-trouble-double-blind-placebo-studies

Hi,

DBT for medication has a placebo, DBT for hifi is a choice.

The definition for DBT is that the person conducting/operating the test, (not the testee) does not know what cable they are changing - so each cable could be inside the same coloured sleeve as an example.

Your reference is about placebo issues, NOT why DBT is wrong.

Regards,

Shadders.