Why "testing" for cable differences is ridiculous.

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by Mike Knapp, Feb 27, 2002.

  1. Mike Knapp

    Mike Knapp Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 1997
    Messages:
    644
    Likes Received:
    20
    Real Name:
    Mike
    FRED: Hey Bob, that new Italian restaurant over on 49th street sure has some sweet lasagne. It tastes a lot different than the stuff we get at The Pasta Pot!
    BOB: Really? Are you sure? Have you done any DB tests?
    FRED: Hey Bob, see that girl in the red dress over there? She looks different than her twin in the blue on the other side of the bar!
    BOB: Really? Are you sure? Have you done any DB tests?
    FRED: Hey Bob, those leather seats in my new car feel different than the ones in your new car.
    BOB: Really? Are you sure? Have you done any DB tests?
    FRED: Hey Bob, this cheese smells different than that cheese back in your fridge.
    BOB: Really? Are you sure? Have you done any DB tests?
    Now you see how ridiculous each of the above response are simply because they deal with one of our human senses which of course is different in each person. BUT....suddenly when it comes to the sense of hearing, the skeptics feel it is perfectly valid to apply a "test" to prove something.
    You will always KNOW what kind of wire you are using. Why in the world would you want to test something in a way that it will NEVER EVER be used?
    Would you test an electric drill underwater? Would you test a scuba tank in a bike race? Why test a cable without the knowledge of which cable it is, you will never use it not knowing.
    The information gathered in a DB test for cables is as worthless as tits on a boar hog for use in real world decision making. The only test that has any validity is a listening test done under the same circumstances that you will be using the product....in your home, in your system. with your knowledge.
    Just my little opinion! [​IMG]
    Mike
     
  2. Jeremy Anderson

    Jeremy Anderson Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 1999
    Messages:
    1,049
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  3. Mike Knapp

    Mike Knapp Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 1997
    Messages:
    644
    Likes Received:
    20
    Real Name:
    Mike
    Jeremy,
    Thanks! I was hoping some levity would come from this post! [​IMG]
    Mike
     
  4. Philip Hamm

    Philip Hamm Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 1999
    Messages:
    6,873
    Likes Received:
    2
     
  5. Chu Gai

    Chu Gai Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    7,270
    Likes Received:
    1
    each of your four Fred/Bob scenarios were easily testable...quick A/B.

     
  6. Brian_C

    Brian_C Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2000
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    0
    Decent arguments, but this one throws you off:

     
  7. Mike Knapp

    Mike Knapp Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 1997
    Messages:
    644
    Likes Received:
    20
    Real Name:
    Mike
    Life is full of bias, thats why things should be judged with the biases intact! You cannot eliminate the bias, perform a test and then expect the results to be valid once the biases are re-established. This holds true for skeptics as well.

    If you did a taste test on some soup, then removed the salt from the recipe and did a comparison but could not buy the soup without the salt anywhere then your test has been futile. You have suceeded in proving a difference but the test is invalid because you cannot eliminate the salt to begin with in the real world.

    Remove the bias....alter the results. Including the bias is the ONLY way to get true real world results.

    Mike
     
  8. Mike Knapp

    Mike Knapp Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 1997
    Messages:
    644
    Likes Received:
    20
    Real Name:
    Mike
     
  9. AjayM

    AjayM Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2000
    Messages:
    1,224
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  10. Jim A. Banville

    Jim A. Banville Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 1999
    Messages:
    630
    Likes Received:
    0
    Face it - even for nothing more than to entertain us non-beleivers, the cable-believers shudder at the idea of having to PROVE that they can tell if one cable sounds differently from another. If the cable-believer can't listen to a piece of music of his own choosing on a high resolution system as many times as he wishes, followed by listening to the same music again as many times as he wishes, except this time he is told that the cables may or may have not been switched, and he can't make the statement "same" or "different", I would be very very skeptical that he has the alleged ability at all. While the cabe-believer may not care less as to whether I believe he has the alleged ability, I don't think he would be here procaliming his ability if it were not to convince someone other than himself.
     
  11. AjayM

    AjayM Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2000
    Messages:
    1,224
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, as always it comes down to cost....but let's look at your examples here,
     
  12. Mike Knapp

    Mike Knapp Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 1997
    Messages:
    644
    Likes Received:
    20
    Real Name:
    Mike
     
  13. John Beavers

    John Beavers Second Unit

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 1998
    Messages:
    259
    Likes Received:
    0
    Speaking of double blind testing of wires, did you know that there is a device that actually facilitates this? And has proven at a public event (CES 1995) that differences do exist, and in a way that fully met the double blind testing standards. Here's a link to the device and it's story http://www.wireworldaudio.com/compare.htm
     
  14. AjayM

    AjayM Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2000
    Messages:
    1,224
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  15. Brian_C

    Brian_C Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2000
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  16. Jim A. Banville

    Jim A. Banville Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 1999
    Messages:
    630
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  17. AjayM

    AjayM Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2000
    Messages:
    1,224
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  18. Jeremy Anderson

    Jeremy Anderson Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 1999
    Messages:
    1,049
    Likes Received:
    0
    Okay, let me see if I can clarify things here:

    Fred goes out and buys a watch, but by "watch" we mean wires. And then Tiffany buys a glass at Wal-Mart, but by "glass" we mean speaker wire and by "Wal-Mart" we mean BetterCables. Or is Tiffany herself BetterCables and Wal-Mart Radio Shack? Then you have Bob, who is just wandering around drooling like an idiot, buying some fake knock-off Rolex for $1200 from a guy on the street! Like THAT's ever a good idea. Silly Bob!

    So I think the moral of this story is:

    Don't buy wires from people on the street, especially from some whore named Tiffany... and if you see Bob or Fred, kick their ass and take their money.
     
  19. Jim A. Banville

    Jim A. Banville Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 1999
    Messages:
    630
    Likes Received:
    0
    So are you saying that, as a cable-believer, that two cables that measure the same will sound the same or different? Or do you want it both ways - cables that measure differently will sound differently, and cables that measure the same will also sound differently? If silver cables are so superior as far as measurements are concerned, why aren't ALL high end cables made of silver? I'll have to do some searching, but I recall an "expert" relating that copper is the best electrical conductor.
     
  20. AjayM

    AjayM Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2000
    Messages:
    1,224
    Likes Received:
    0
     

Share This Page