Objectivist or Subjectivist? Give Me a Break

[j_j]

I'm not in the ultimate fidelity camp but how many of these cables regardless of price would actually pass let's say, a 1kHz square wave null test? As you say easy enough to measure and prove. The contrary was never my assertion.

How about, instead of a square-wave test, you measure impulse response using 24/192 and about 60khz bandwidth? That way, you see, you can learn everything you can from a square-wave test at any frequency and a lot more.

But, now, what is "pass"? Define "pass"? Null vs. what? What rise time on the square wave? Do you want 500kHz bandwidth or will you settle for 50?

 

[JackD201]

Why not?

Pass=Null

 

[j_j]

Why not?

Pass=Null

Define null. Null to what level? There is literally no such thing as an absolute, 100% null, physics prevents it. So what null are you asking for? To what level? Over what bandwidth?

Yes, it matters. The only way to ever get a perfect null is with pure digital systems.

 

[JackD201]

What would you consider an acceptable level J-J? This is your area of expertise not mine. At what point do cables become indistinguishable (sound the same) as others (not me) claim they do?

Shouldn't you be asking the guy that said all cables sound the same these questions?

 

[cnpope]

A simple trick- make the cable in question longer and see if its easier to see its effects.

It might be a simple trick, but it could be a rather costly one for a "high-end" cable!

 

[Gregadd]

It amuses me that such perfect measurements yields such mediocre results Now that I spend less time on this forum I have more time to spend watching Herman Edwards et al on E'SPN. I recall Coach Edwards' stating the obvious,"Hello? You play to win the game."
The purpose of assembling a stereo reproduction system is to create the illusion of live music All else is fun but not the point.

 

[cnpope]

From what I have seen, the cable sector seems to have the best markup.

You can measure the effects of audiophile cables- the trick is to measure the system spectral bandwidth in the room rather than the cable itself. On the bench it seems harder to quantify the effects of one cable to another like you can measure in a functioning system, and the effects of a given cable will vary from system to system.

It seems to me that you are then introducing a lot of additional acoustical phenomena, which can be hard to measure precisely, into what at heart should be a simple question of signal modification by the cable itself. If two cables give rise to different sounds, then this means that the signal voltages at the output ends of the two cables, for a given signal at the input end, must be different. A natural first step would be to set up a measurement where one subtracts the signal voltage at the output end from the signal voltage at the input end, and looks at the difference signal. It should be easy enough then to see how well this correlates with the theoretical predictions based on the basic resistance, capacitance and inductance parameters of the cable. By such means, one can get to grips with establishing exactly what a particular cable is doing to the signal.

If the two different cables do give rise to different perceived sounds, then it should be possible to correlate these effects with the measurements. As always, though, claims of perceived audible differences only really have value in the context of double-blind tests.

Chris

 

[j_j]

What would you consider an acceptable level J-J? This is your area of expertise not mine. At what point do cables become indistinguishable (sound the same) as others (not me) claim they do?

Shouldn't you be asking the guy that said all cables sound the same these questions?

You are the one who proposed the test. There is a reason I didn't propose this test, I understand how hard it is to meaningfully evaluate the test you've proposed.

Please don't try to start an argument again, your disdain, contempt, and inflammatory behavior are painfully obvious.

If you want to know what's wrong with this test, please start a thread on "how would we test an audio device" and I may deign to join the discussion if it's not too insulting and inflammatory. I am retired for a reason, I am tired of dealing with inflammatory ridicule and pseudoscience.

 

[j_j]

It seems to me that you are then introducing a lot of additional acoustical phenomena, ...
Chris

If the question is electrical, it can be answered electrically. No need for acoustic radiation.

 

[Groucho]

Groucho categorically said that cables all sound the same.

Ah, you've had your cake and eaten it, I see. The person who added the caveat "well designed" was caught out for thereby admitting that some cables sound different from others - the implication being that any deviation from a strict "all cables sound the same" is an admission that there are varying degrees of "well designed" therefore there are varying degrees of sound quality from all cables. I, myself, toyed with the idea of adding the caveat "competently designed" or some such, but decided against it for that reason. But I, too, have been skewered.

You're attempting to use the existence of broken shields or 1 km cables or corroded connectors as a proof that cables sound different.

 

[j_j]

Ah, you've had your cake and eaten it, I see. The person who added the caveat "well designed" was caught out for thereby admitting that some cables sound different from others - the implication being that any deviation from a strict "all cables sound the same" is an admission that there are varying degrees of "well designed" therefore there are varying degrees of sound quality from all cables.

You can't win in a religious argument, Groucho, and the only answer is "swordfish".

 

[JackD201]

You are the one who proposed the test. There is a reason I didn't propose this test, I understand how hard it is to meaningfully evaluate the test you've proposed.

Please don't try to start an argument again, your disdain, contempt, and inflammatory behavior are painfully obvious.

If you want to know what's wrong with this test, please start a thread on "how would we test an audio device" and I may deign to join the discussion if it's not too insulting and inflammatory. I am retired for a reason, I am tired of dealing with inflammatory ridicule and pseudoscience.

JJ, I didn't propose a test. I just happened to mention a test that I'd seen performed on the net. You proposed another test that is better, one that you say tells you everything one needs to know? I said "why not?" or in other words let's use yours since you think the one I mentioned was not as good. No problem. Where is the "disdain, contempt and inflammatory behavior" in that?

BTW it is easy to win a religious argument if you actually knew what the guy's religion is.

 

[j_j]

Where is the "disdain, contempt and inflammatory behavior" in that?

BTW it is easy to win a religious argument if you actually knew what the guy's religion is.

Um, you have never seen any of that in audiophile discussions? You mentioned a test, then asked me what sensitivity I would set it to, you didn't address how you would evaluate a "null" nor would you specify how much of a null you demand. Now you want to know what I would do with a better test.

Why don't you make up your mind what you want to demand of others, and how much free consulting you want, m'kay?

Start a thread on how to measure somewhere, and we can talk.

 

[Shaffer]

Why don't you make up your mind what you want to demand of others, and how much free consulting you want, m'kay?

Free Consulting? Really? This is a discussion forum where we openly share ideas. I'm actually embarrassed having to say this.

 

[JackD201]

I've seen many JJ. Let's not get ahead of ourselves here. This discussion started way before that "test" I mentioned. We can all scroll back and see where I joined and what I was reacting to and we can all scroll back to where you joined in. No need to rehash it in this post.

Let me just make one thing crystal clear. I hold no disdain or contempt for you. Period. If anything, I am actually grateful for your work because it has allowed me and millions out there to enjoy music practically anytime and anywhere and allowed us to also enjoy many a motion picture.

So far it seems you are quick to impute motive on me through this medium. Perhaps it is because you see my signature down below with all the expensive stuff. That doesn't mean that I am some sort of religious zealot.

 

[JackD201]

You're attempting to use the existence of broken shields or 1 km cables or corroded connectors as a proof that cables sound different.

No.

 

[Shaffer]

Ah, you've had your cake and eaten it, I see. The person who added the caveat "well designed" was caught out for thereby admitting that some cables sound different from others - the implication being that any deviation from a strict "all cables sound the same" is an admission that there are varying degrees of "well designed" therefore there are varying degrees of sound quality from all cables. I, myself, toyed with the idea of adding the caveat "competently designed" or some such, but decided against it for that reason. But I, too, have been skewered.

You're attempting to use the existence of broken shields or 1 km cables or corroded connectors as a proof that cables sound different.

Forgive me, it's been a while since I've seen an Internet cable debate, as joyfully thrilling as it may be. As I understand, the objectivist position asserts that all cables with similar/identical LCR characteristics sound the same. How is a perspective buyer going to know these values? By carrying his testbench to the shop and entertaining the troops by meter-reading, while their costumers leave the store? What are the logistics of choosing cables "scientifically?" Best I can tell, it's a process of walking into a hardware store and choosing something that looks "right," whatever that may be. Very scientific, indeed, or more accurately, the choice is based on a belief system. That pretty much defines the concept of religion. Please remind us, where does the science come into this exercise?

 

[cnpope]

Forgive me, it's been a while since I've seen an Internet cable debate, as joyfully thrilling as it may be. As I understand, the objectivist position asserts that all cables with similar/identical LCR characteristics sound the same. How is a perspective buyer going to know these values? By carrying his testbench to the shop and entertaining the troops by meter-reading, while their costumers leave the store? What are the logistics of choosing cables "scientifically?" Best I can tell, it's a process of walking into a hardware store and choosing something that looks "right," whatever that may be. Very scientific, indeed, or more accurately, the choice is based on a belief system. That pretty much defines the concept of religion. Please remind us, where does the science come into this exercise?

The issues involved in connecting pieces of electronic equipment with cables are well understood, and can all be adressed in terms of basic engineering and physical principles. The case of home audio electronics is particularly simple, because the frequencies, currents, voltages and distances involved are very small compared with the far more demanding circumstances that can arise in other branches of electrical and electronic engineering. So there really are no particularly profound issues here. Unless the cable has some really bad characteristics, such as a speaker cable with a high resistance, it is probably not going to have any detectable impact on the sound. A few simple measurements would probably easily reveal the shortcomings of such a cable.

Claims of profound improvements resulting from switching to a "high-end" cable should be treated with extreme scepticism unless they can be backed up by reputable double-blind listening tests. At the very most, any genuine and verifiable differences between actual cables (as opposed to "rigged" ones with manifest deliberately-introduced deficiencies) are likely to be tiny.

If one wanted to have "profound" impacts on the quality of the audio reproduction, it would be more worthwhile to focus on important factors like the choice of loudspeakers, rather than the trivialities of cable types.

Chris

 

[audioguy]

I love the religion and cable “differences” get thrown into the same bucket. A person either believes in God or does not. The believer can look at the world around him or circumstances in his life and “conclude” God is responsible for this. He believes that no accident or length of time or anything else could possibly, for example, create the incredibly complex human body. The unbeliever says that this all happened by either some cosmic event or some transformation process from one entity to another (evolution) and quotes scientific “theory” to back his position. But, in fact, there are no scientific and “proven” measurements that “prove” God either exists or does not. And given that most of us were not around when this universe was created (though there are some mornings where I am not so sure), there is no absolute “proof”. It in the end is 100% faith.

Cable measurements, on the other hand, do exist and, to my knowledge, no one has ever suggested they are only theories. They are very measurable and repeatable and demonstrable. But the believer insists, it appears, that we must dismiss science or conclude that that we don’t know enough or that there are measurements that we have not discovered in order to conclude that two competently designed and built cables with identical measurements will somehow sound different.

Believing in God is a whole lot easier, for me, than “believing” in the sonic differences in competently designed and built cables. I must confess, however, that there was a time I was a cable believer because every audio magazine (and most high end dealers) said there was. But then I made the mistake of doing some blind listening to a bunch of different cables and all of the “differences” instantly disappeared.

Oops !!!

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Forgive me, it's been a while since I've seen an Internet cable debate, as joyfully thrilling as it may be. As I understand, the objectivist position asserts that all cables with similar/identical LCR characteristics sound the same. How is a perspective buyer going to know these values? By carrying his testbench to the shop and entertaining the troops by meter-reading, while their costumers leave the store? What are the logistics of choosing cables "scientifically?" Best I can tell, it's a process of walking into a hardware store and choosing something that looks "right," whatever that may be. Very scientific, indeed, or more accurately, the choice is based on a belief system. That pretty much defines the concept of religion. Please remind us, where does the science come into this exercise?

I don't think you have to walk into your high-end shop with a buch of testing equipment. I think it is much simpler than that -- Don't buy crap. Buy quality cable from reputable manufacturers. Don't buy the cheapest stuff. Belden wouldn't be a bad baseline. Even then you'll probably end up paying too much, as the cheapo RCA cable in the bubble pack on the peg sounds the same as long as its not broken, but the quality cable will last longer and look better, and that's all good. The real danger here is not in getting a cable that sounds bad; I suspect that's pretty rare. The danger, in the high end, is paying an absurd amount of money for a cable that doesn't sound any different than the one you could have picked up at Radio Shack for a few bucks.

Tim