The "Real Cable-Test Debate" (1 Viewer)

[Tan_N]

Philip,

Thanks for taking the time to experiment for yourself.. Please report that you do find a difference.. I want to know.

 

[Philip Hamm]

Tan,

Check out my previous message I changed it.

I love playing the devil's advocate in these wire threads. I like you am very much on the fence in this area.

 

[AjayM]

you hold in your hand a 15lb bowling ball (speaker wire).

you put it down and hold a 16lb bowing ball (speaker wire).

can you tell the difference?? YES!!!

you hold 100 grains of sugar (interconnect)..

you put it down and hold 90 grains of sugar (interconnect)

Can you tell the difference?? NO!!!

That's why you can hear a difference in speaker wires and you can not in Inter-connects!!! Speaker wires transport more powerful signals therefore is detectable by the human ear. Interconnects transport a very small signal and less likely to be noticed...

I see, so since we are talking about such a HUGE difference that is the reason why there could be no difference. Interesting, well I'm not going to use an analogy, I'm going to use an example to show you how little those differences can be.

I'm going to pick me up one of those 110db effecient Unity horn speakers. That means that it will reach 110db with 2.83v of power. Now since I don't like listening to anything that loud, let's say a more modest 90db listening level. We'll whip out the math here and do some calculations.

110db - 1watt of power

107db - .5watts of power

104db - .25watts of power

101db - .125 watts of power

98db - .0625 watts of power

95db - .0312 watts of power

92db - .0156 watts of power

89db - .0078 watts of power

86db - .0039 watts of power

83db - .0020 watts of power

80db - .0010 watts of power

Hmmm, so .01 watt of power is what is needed to get to around 90db of volume. That equals a whopping .89v...whew that's a lot!

Hmmm, how about a more common 90db effecient speaker and a 70db volume.

90db - 1watt

87db - .5watt

84db - .25watt

81db - .125watt

78db - .0625watt

75db - .0312watt

72db - .0156watt

69db - .0078watt

Pretty much the same result. My example a few posts ago was at a full 500watts, first not a lot of us have 500 watt amps (to a single channel) and second I doubt most people would run at a full 500watts all the time (unless you have the most ineffecient speakers known to man).

So again, can somebody explain this to me without using silly anaologies that don't work.

Andrew

 

[Tan_N]

AjayM,

if that's the case then you dont need a amp at all.. just spice your interconnect and connect them straight to your speakers.. the signal should be about 4 watts.. so you should get more than 90dbs.

 

[Charles J P]

I’ll feel stupid if anything like this has already been posted. Some of the statements on the first two pages just struck a chord with me. I guess I have never really thought of cable testing that way before. So, not to be repetitive, but a list of problems with any kind of cable testing:

1)you can only test believers because non-believers will just say “same” every time even if they did hear a difference [gasp]

2)there are two points of view regarding whether or not cables sound differently a) if you hear a difference then they sound differently if not, they don’t. b) reality is independent from our beliefs. They either sound different or they don’t, and it doesn’t matter if you can hear the difference unless you can prove it.

3)coming from #2, many believers would subscribe to opinion a), they fully acknowledge that not everyone will hear the difference, but if they can they are willing to spend their money on more expensive cables. Many non-believers subscribe to theory b) they don’t care about the touchy feely stuff they want 100% accuracy

4)#s 2 and 3 lead to differing opinions regarding how tests should be performed. Many believers feel that sighted tests are more relevant because they are closer to real life listening conditions, but of course non-believers will just cry foul if the believer can see the cable.

So, I propose this. I agree with the fact that non-believers cannot be tested because they can just say same every time… but, what if you tested people in pairs 1 non-believer and one believer. Have the believer be sighted, and the non-believer be blind, and each person hooked up to a polygraph machine. Now I know those aren’t supposed to 100% accurate either but bear with me. The non-believer is just required to say same or different, and the believer is required to say better or worse.

What if your results looked like this. Every time there was a “switch” the non-believer would assumingly say “same” what if there was 100% correlation the cable was not really switched, the polygraph looked normal and every time there was a switch and he said same, it read as if he was lying?

And then of course if the assumption was that the believer would just say better for the nicer/more expensive cable, and worse for the in-the-box cable, so you could just monitor him for lying. Of course the non-believer and believer could not hear each other’s responses.

Now, I know this would not necessarily be conclusive, but I think it would be damn interesting.

 

[Jim A. Banville]

Leave non-beleivers (like me) out of the test completely. The test is to see if people that claim to hear differences in cables actually can, period. I would also rather not see any "cable comparator" in the signal chain because this just gives the beleivers an excuse as to why they can't hear the difference when they get less than 100% correct(I'm still waiting for someone to tell me what the HUGE variable is in a blind test that makes a $1 throw-away cable sound THE SAME as a cost-no-object cable from a 'boutique' company to someone who gets the switches "correct" 80% of the time, like Mike Knapp did). Just have a couple of people at the appropriate positions to change cables when necessary. The people administering the test could flip the coins prior to the test so they know ahead of time when and if cables are to be switched. The cable switchers would have a copy of the "script" and would switch (or act like they're switching) cables at the appropriate times. Why? I've SEEN people use the cable comparator as an EXCUSE as to why they failed to perform their trick

 

[Lee Scoggins]

Jim,
Now I am definitely going to use a comparator to further tweak you.

Lee

 

[Jim A. Banville]

Now I am definitely going to use a comparator to further tweak you.

Go ahead But if you use it for the test, go ahead and prepare yourself for the excuses those that fail to hear differences will use that the comparator eliminated the "difference" between the cables

 

[RicP]

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me what the HUGE variable is in a blind test that makes a $1 throw-away cable sound THE SAME as a cost-no-object cable from a 'boutique' company to someone who gets the switches "correct" 80% of the time

Who said the "variable" had to be huge? I believe all we said was that it was distinguishable. It could be as simple as the shimmer of a cymbal.
Here's a question for you...
Why do you think that your ears are as good or your ability to listen to music critically is as developed as someone elses?
People have different vision levels correct? People hear differently as well and like it or not, there are people that can hear things exceptionally well. Perhaps 3-5 Khz higher than another person can, perhaps 3-5hz lower. Moreover, everything in a system interacts with everything else. Someone with a good ear that has a very revealing system will be much more apt to hear the smallest differences in anything presented. So when presented with music in this range, the difference between 2 cable runs which may or may not affect those frequencies are very apparent to this person, and completely lost on someone who simply cannot hear the difference. I don't see how one human's ability to distinguish differences on one system equates to another human's ability to distinguish on a completely different system (their own).
Asking people to identify differences in controlled 30 second blasts of music is as ludicrous as asking Ray Charles or Stevie Wonder to identify the maker of a grand piano by playing 1 note. If they could not do as such, but could give you the correct answer after playing the piano for an hour would you question their ear?

 

[Chu Gai]

that would be an interesting test Ric, especially if they were to listen to the piano being played instead of playing it themselves (elimination of tactile feedback). the sounds though that a piano, largely a mechanical device, creates is quite complex, as it depends upon the environment that it is in, humidity, age of the instrument..complex resonances and overtones.

you are quite correct in pointing out that vision and hearing varies from among individuals but that in itself is insufficient reason to postulate that as a basis for being able to reliably discriminate amongst cables. Nor, as you stated,

Why do you think that your ears are as good or your ability to listen to music critically is as developed as someone elses?

This is not an issue of critical listening, but an issue of auditory memory in humans and whether they can successfully and reliably compare at the very least, two wires. I ask you respectfully, in your own opinion, if a 30 second sound bite is insufficient, what then is it that you propose and furthermore, what speakers and listening environment constitue revealing? Are Avantgarde's Trios revealing? Maybe Paragigms? Dynaudio? Certain brands of electrostatics? Will a Bryston amp suffice or will a top of the line Denon? Respectfully, I ask, when time permits, to share your thoughts.

 

[Philip Hamm]

Charles J P, you're not getting the non-believer's situation here at all. No polygraph is required.

The non-believer will not hear a difference based on psychoaccoustics and the preconvieved notion that there will not be a difference. It's the same reason that the "believer" will hear a difference. They won't be lying when they say that everything sounds the same, everything will truly sound the same to them even if it's just a little different because subconciously they believe very strongly that no difference can exist. This is especially a problem in cables because the alleged differences are very subtle as Ric points out.

 

[Tan_N]

RicP,
You're start to get the Non-Believer's point!!! A few more post and you will be saying the same thing

Who said the "variable" had to be huge? I believe all we said was that it was distinguishable. It could be as simple as the shimmer of a cymbal.

Dont make go back to all the threads and quote every time a Believer made a "such a big difference" claim.
As we get further and further into this debate the Believers will start to move towards the middle. While the Non-Believers will still be at their opposite extreme.
Buy the way, the rules of my Test indicate that the Listener can listen to the song as long as they want. They are the person who will say stop, so dont worry about 30 seconds. Plus it's a "Reference Cable" vs $1. What are you afraid of????

 

[Philip Hamm]

It's obvious that if the believers are afraid of anything it's that the proverbial emporer has no clothes. However, I'm completely convinced that most cable believers are perfectly happy to think the emporer is wearing clothes without really caring to find out whether he really is or not. (Note: my opinion is that the emporer is wearing at least some clothes in this debate. Maybe just a jock strap or tighty wighteys, but are least something.)

 

[Tan_N]

I used to be a Believer...
I used to make those "such a big difference" claims...
I jumpped right into a blind test with full confidence...
Where am I now???
Blaming my "Non-Golden Ears" and waiting for someone to take the TEST and restore my confidence in Audio Inter-connects.
Seriously... I am a Believer in denial!!! I still want to believe... I want to say with confidence that there is a difference...
hey Philip... That hurt when you edit your post... :frowning:

 

[AjayM]

Hey, Lee said he could do a test of interconnects as well as testing speaker cables in the test that he's setting up, and he has Chu helping him out to keep him honest. And not at the same time, since we all know 16lb bowling balls sound different than 9 grains of sugar when being hauled around in a semi truck instead of a Geo.
So what's the problem?
Andrew

 

[RicP]

Quote:

What test? I've done that more times than I can count. Come up to NJ and I'll be glad to show you time and time again.
Again, I'll say it...it's astounding to me that there are people that think all humans have the same ability to discern auditory differences. They don't. Nor does everyone have an audio playback system that can adequately reveal whatever differences happen to be there, whether they are caused by cables or by the addition of tubes or a separate power amp.
Not all people have the same ears, not all people have the same system, not all people hear the same things. What are the "non-believers" so worried about? Oh yeah....money. Take the monetary part out of the discussion and none of you would give the proverbial "rat's ass" if people could hear differences between cables.

 

[Tan_N]

That's GREAT!!! Just test the Audio Interconnects... All other varibles must remain constant.. I dont know if Lee will agree, but you have to use a Receiver because a Pre-amp & amp combo require more Inter-connects to connect them.
A another good reason to use a Receiver is because the majority of the people out there are using receivers. Plus since we are testing a "Reference Cable" vs $1, the sound "difference" should be so vast, that it wouldn't matter.
Even a difference in sound volume indicates a difference!

 

[AjayM]

Ummmm, why would you just test interconnects? As long as you don't do it at the same what does it matter? And why do we have to use a reciever? If you are using a pre-pro and amp then you hook up using your reference cables through-out, and then you can switch one set out at a time. Everything remains constant and the same, so where's the problem?

Andrew

 

[Tan_N]

the problem is time delay.. if you have to wait more than a few seconds between switching cables.. how are you supposed to remember what the previous cable sounded like???

Plus if you introduce a second set of cables to connect your pre-amp to amp, which set would you use?? the "Reference" or $1? There would be too much debate about test results..

 

[Charles J P]

This is great, to "make it easy" on the believers, first you say you can use whatever high-end equipment you want and will compare the cheapest cable to the most expensive, to give you the best chance of getting it right. Now you say

but you have to use a Receiver because a Pre-amp & amp combo require more Inter-connects to connect them.

. Ric P I will come over and conduct this test with you. I will be the administrator, and you can use any equipment you want as long as its Fisher, and you can use any source you want as long as its a CD-R burned from 64kbs MP3s :rolleyes