Observations of a controlled Cable Test - Page 7 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #181 of 384 Old 11-23-2007, 11:49 AM
AVS Special Member
 
krabapple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: in a state bordered by Kentucky and Maine
Posts: 5,276
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 113 Post(s)
Liked: 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Grant View Post

So let's be clear, the test didn't prove whether or not there are audible differences between cables. Not between any two pairs, and not between these two pairs in particular. Not for any listener, and not for Mike L. in particular.

What it did prove is that Mike L.'s confidence in his own discerning ability needs adjusting, downward. And though it doesn't prove anything about subjectivists in general, it certainly ought to cause any intellectually honest one to question their own confidence, too.

Yeah!
krabapple is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #182 of 384 Old 11-23-2007, 12:03 PM
Advanced Member
 
JJay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 856
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutgar View Post

They're ignoring it because the results of this particular test leans towards their belief. I'm in the crowd that believes this test doesn't definitively prove anything, and that it was flawed from the beginning. I'd even be willing to bet that in spite of this test, Mike has no intentions of keeping the Monsters over the Opus. As others have pointed out, if this is to continue, then the next step should be a straight ABX in order to ascertain any differences instantaneously. I also think that there should be more than one person subjected to the test.


I am not ignoring it. I fully understand what his point and stated in my post that this test had very narrow 'findings' but that it had the same conclusion as every similar test before it. I also would like to see instantaneous switching to remove that variable but of course it adds the variable of the switch box.

If, after a few second pause, you are no longer able to differentiate between $100 cables and $10,000 cables (even if a difference were to exist-and that's a huge if) what is the point of purchasing the more expensive cables? Talk about diminishing returns...

Jaime

If you can't say anything kind at least have the decency to be vague...
JJay is offline  
post #183 of 384 Old 11-23-2007, 01:20 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Chu Gai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NYC area
Posts: 14,751
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 145 Post(s)
Liked: 440
So, you have to ask yourself, "Do you feel lucky, punk?"


"I've found that when you want to know the truth about someone that someone is probably the last person you should ask." - Gregory House
Chu Gai is online now  
post #184 of 384 Old 11-23-2007, 01:44 PM
AVS Special Member
 
CharlesJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,229
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 81 Post(s)
Liked: 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by JJay View Post

. But also remember, this test is not a singularity and its conclusion follows every other similar test before it. Given enough of these 'narrow' tests showing the same result we can start making bit broader conclusions...

Yes, people forget this aspect of historical audio testing
After a while, the null hypothesis needs to be accepted.
CharlesJ is offline  
post #185 of 384 Old 11-23-2007, 02:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
CharlesJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,229
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 81 Post(s)
Liked: 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutgar View Post

They're ignoring it because the results of this particular test leans towards their belief.

Not ignored, I bet, but manual switching was the choice for Mike, I believe. Hence a long time constant to switch bi-wired speakers. Other tests from the past with ABX quick switch had similar results, so nothing is really out of the ordinary here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutgar View Post

I'm in the crowd that believes this test doesn't definitively prove anything,

Does a single drug trial proves anything?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutgar View Post

I'd even be willing to bet that in spite of this test, Mike has no intentions of keeping the Monsters over the Opus.

Was that a prerequisite of the test that he switch to Monster if he fails? Hardly. So why would he switch cables even if he is convinced of no differences? With his setup and means I would be inclined to get something appropriate for that visual impact, a personal preference issue totally. Perhaps he will change what claims he will make in the future though, at least about cables


Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutgar View Post

I also think that there should be more than one person subjected to the test.


That would be good if you can fine others to participate but no reason not to test only one person. Others are certainly welcome to replicate the test of those cables.
CharlesJ is offline  
post #186 of 384 Old 11-23-2007, 03:05 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Rutgar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 5,446
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by krabapple View Post

Hilariously, it was *objectivists* (like me!) who were pushing Mike to make this an ABX test in the first place, as we know it is designed to maximize the subject's powers of discrimination. He's the one who seemed uncomfortable with that.

Yes, I know that. And I'm giving you credit. But even 'The Amazing Randi', if it really was him, concluded the test proved nothing.

I admit that I didn't think immediate ABX was necessary. But after thinking about it further and also after the results of this test, I can see where if the point is to try and prove a difference, then the ABX is probably the way to go. Like I indicated in my previous post, at RMAF, I found that listening fatigue sat in quickly. Which is also why I changed my mind about ABX.

Rutgar is offline  
post #187 of 384 Old 11-23-2007, 04:05 PM
AVS Special Member
 
krabapple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: in a state bordered by Kentucky and Maine
Posts: 5,276
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 113 Post(s)
Liked: 173
Rutgar, I (and others, like Michael Grant) have laid out my reasons over several posts and several days now why this test is something more than useless but very much less than definitive. Absolutist rhetoric isn't warranted here, and I've consistently advised caution in phrasing the results, both here an on the JREF forum. Mr. Randi, who appears to be unfamiliar with all the particulars, is free to rebut our reasoning. As are you. Let me know when you feel up to it.
krabapple is offline  
post #188 of 384 Old 11-23-2007, 04:12 PM
Advanced Member
 
terry j's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 14
surely the test did prove something?? Yeah, it did have points that anyone of whatever persuasion can pick and niggle at.

But is it not the overwhelming conclusion that, even if it did not prove the existence of very subtle differences (which is where the argument has ended), it DID prove that these amazing, revelatory and absolutely phenomenal improvements always claimed simply do NOT exist??

The language used in cable reviews and improvements do not revolve around miniscule, minor or peripheral changes, and never have to fall back to arguments like aesthetics or build quality to justify adoption of these cables, the sole justification given to these cables is their wonderful SONIC properties.

Surely, flawed as it is, this test has answered that aspect at least??
terry j is offline  
post #189 of 384 Old 11-23-2007, 05:55 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Rutgar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 5,446
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by JJay View Post


If, after a few second pause, you are no longer able to differentiate between $100 cables and $10,000 cables (even if a difference were to exist-and that's a huge if) what is the point of purchasing the more expensive cables? Talk about diminishing returns...

The difference is in the long term listening. The flaws and differences of any audio gear will show after hours of listening. I'm extremely sensitive to listening fatigue. And if anyone here has followed my posts for any length of time on this forum, they would know that I've gone through tons of crap and frustration to get my system to sound right. The ordeal is far too lengthy to re-cap here. But suffice it to say that since I added the MIT's to my system, my music listening has increased substantially. Listening to music is 'fun' again. Of course I've done quite a few other things to get to this point, but the MIT cables put things over the top. I'm sure there are many here that think I'm full of it, or deluding myself. But that doesn't matter to me. What matters is that after many years, I'm finally listening to and enjoying music again, whereas previously I had nothing more than a really expensive HT system. And for that, the MIT's were worth every penny I paid for them.

Rutgar is offline  
post #190 of 384 Old 11-23-2007, 07:35 PM
Advanced Member
 
terry j's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutgar View Post

The difference is in the long term listening. The flaws and differences of any audio gear will show after hours of listening.

But suffice it to say that since I added the MIT's to my system, my music listening has increased substantially.

But that doesn't matter to me. What matters is that after many years, I'm finally listening to and enjoying music again, whereas previously I had nothing more than a really expensive HT system. And for that, the MIT's were worth every penny I paid for them.

Can I ask Rutgar, after what we've seen so far, are you still every bit as confident as you've ever been that you could reliably pick your cables over (say) the monsters??

I'm very sure that the 'long term listening' could, with a bit of work, be incorporated into a mutually agreed upon protocol. As far as I can tell, there is nothing inherent in ABX testing that prohibits 'long term listening'.

I'm not trying to be challenging, but I am curious. What, if anything, have you personally gotten from this trial, or is it totally meaningless?
terry j is offline  
post #191 of 384 Old 11-23-2007, 07:59 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Nuance's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 11,583
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 58
Mike and Chris

Thanks for doing this. I appreciate the hard work and time you both put into this. Well done!

My journey to find the "perfect" speaker
Dr. Olive's Blog

 

 

No matter what measurements tell us, a loudspeaker isn’t good until it
sounds good. - Dr. Floyd Toole
Nuance is offline  
post #192 of 384 Old 11-23-2007, 11:12 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Curt Palme's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 18,955
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 23
A very interesting thread. While I'm the biggest (or one of, at least) objectivist here, I don't think that the test is the end-all-be-all test to say that all cables sound the same, but I'll bet Mike's position has shifted from where it was a week ago..

No question that there are many other factors, not the least of which is the human body that affects what you're hearing and perceiving to hear.

www.curtpalme.com - CRT tech info

www.soundsolutionscanada.com -pro audio website
Curt Palme is offline  
post #193 of 384 Old 11-23-2007, 11:26 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dizzman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 5,251
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
I'm sure there are many here that think I'm full of it, or deluding myself. But that doesn't matter to me.

None of us care what you use, but as long as you accept that there is the possibility that you are deluding yourself... then we are all on the same page.

At the end of the day... all that matter is you enjoy your system.

Proud Daddy to Anastasia and Christopher.
Born October 26 2005.

Ob was the delivery doc.

Since i cannot rant on a soapbox in the town square...
http://commonsensehasdied.blogspot.com/
Dizzman is offline  
post #194 of 384 Old 11-24-2007, 03:49 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Chu Gai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NYC area
Posts: 14,751
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 145 Post(s)
Liked: 440
Quote:


The language used in cable reviews and improvements do not revolve around miniscule, minor or peripheral changes, and never have to fall back to arguments like aesthetics or build quality to justify adoption of these cables, the sole justification given to these cables is their wonderful SONIC properties.

The language used is nothing more than exaggerated advertising and advertising itself is exaggeration. It's told by men who admittedly have very nice systems that many would be envious of. Yet these are men that have problems with selective auditory focussing and a strong tendency to being influenced by biases. So long as we recognize the phrases as 'tall tales' we can look upon cables with a more realistic eye and ear.

"I've found that when you want to know the truth about someone that someone is probably the last person you should ask." - Gregory House
Chu Gai is online now  
post #195 of 384 Old 11-24-2007, 06:15 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Rutgar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 5,446
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by terry j View Post

Can I ask Rutgar, after what we've seen so far, are you still every bit as confident as you've ever been that you could reliably pick your cables over (say) the monsters??

I'm very sure that the 'long term listening' could, with a bit of work, be incorporated into a mutually agreed upon protocol. As far as I can tell, there is nothing inherent in ABX testing that prohibits 'long term listening'.

I'm not trying to be challenging, but I am curious. What, if anything, have you personally gotten from this trial, or is it totally meaningless?

Hi Terry,

This trial doesn't really mean anything to me other that I found it interesting from a spectator's view. The reason being that I have never heard the Transparent Opus. So I don't really know what it is they're supposed to do or not do compared to regular cables. Not to mention that I would have to win the lotto to ever even think about buying $30K speaker cables!

I don't know if I could tell the difference using the MIT's in the same sort of test that Mike L. used. But I do know the difference I heard the moment I connected the MIT's to my system. And to further support this difference, I heard the exact same thing at RMAF in the MIT room. As I said in the other thread, I was in the MIT room, and they had some music playing while they were still setting stuff up. I was casually talking to a friend of mine, when one of the guys with MIT walked behind the speakers and unplugged one of their cables (which at the time was running parallel with MIT's standard in wall 'zip cord'). The sound field collapsed so suddenly and noticeable that I quickly turned my head to see what he just did. This incident reinforced what I heard the MIT's do with my system at home. In this case, this comparison was about as 'blind' as 'blind' can be. Because, it wasn't a set up test, and I wasn't actively listening. It wasn't even supposed to be a comparison. It was simply a guy unplugging a cable to get set up for the show.

Later, MIT did set up a demo, to demonstrate this affect. And they performed it throughout the show. I know that there are members of this forum that went to RMAF. And I would be interested in hearing their perspective of the MIT demo, providing they sat through it.

So, could I pick out the MIT's in blind test? I don't know, I haven't tried. But I do know that I am enjoying my system more than I have in years. And I give the MIT's a certain amount of credit for that.

As far as any actual testing on my part. I'll have to wait and see. There is a large group of audio enthusiast here in the Dallas area. And it's possible we could get something set up. But like I said before, I also want to let the dust settle on the current test performed by Mike and Chris.

Rutgar is offline  
post #196 of 384 Old 11-24-2007, 07:45 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mike lavigne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Redmond, Wa.
Posts: 1,139
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Reflections a week later on the 'test'.

basically, i suppose i agree with Randi that the test meant little......not for the same reason that Randi states (not sufficient trials)......but because with the benefit of hindsight......it was really more a small essential practice step and not really definative of much. with the time it took to actually get the Monster cable in-house....and then the screw-on spades....and all the back and forth that led up to last week's test......more was made of it by me and others than it deserved. many here said as much and Randi maybe said it most strongly. i suppose i felt a bit of pressure for 'something' to happen and so i was too hasty in my approach.

OTOH the test did clearly put me back on my heals and humble me in terms of how my brain works on sighted verses blind testing......but ideally that should have been discovered thru my own work on blind testing and should not have been a surprise during such a trumpeted event. i would guess anyone else going down the same road will learn from my experience.

i am not saying i will ever pass a blind test.....until/unless i do last week's results are all i can go on. it may even be that i am not such the experienced good listener that i had thought i was and that others may easily accomplish what i did not.

my other impression after a week is that i kinda let down my subjectivist brethern and now they have to put up with all the flack when i should have been more prepared. personally, i guess i am not so concerned about the political consequences to myself.....i always reserve the right to learn something......but it's more than just about me. i certainly put cable subjectivists (much more) on the defensive (and i feel bad about that).

i'm not yet ready to jump back into doing cable comparisons; but when i do i will have lots more practice prior to any further testing.

this is not 'sour grapes'. i am not in denial.......and last week's event was valid for what we did. but it is just scratching the surface of the issue.
mike lavigne is offline  
post #197 of 384 Old 11-24-2007, 08:32 AM
Advanced Member
 
terry j's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 14
chin up Mike, you sound a bit down!! Thankyou once again, it must have been, and I can see that it was, draining on many levels.

Don't rush into any more tests yet, if you're a bit down then it would be even harder to pick the diffs.

On the whole, I think the response to your tests has been rather reasoned, nowhere near as much 'crowing' etc as some might have imagined...and I think the absence of gloating has a lot to do with the handsome manner in which you have conducted yourself. Kudos.

Mike on reflection, do you think as many others do, that somehow DBT's (not that this was a perfect one) are unreal or obscure the subtle results that may exist? I accept that you're not in denial and so looking for an excuse, but I guess I'm asking from what you've learnt, what would you do differently if there was a next time, and why. Maybe the answer here is the 'extended listening' approach of an evening at least per audition.

Thanks Rutgar for the answer, I recall you saying that now you've typed it again, it could have been earlier in this thread? Sorry for asking and making you type it again!!
terry j is offline  
post #198 of 384 Old 11-24-2007, 08:44 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Chu Gai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NYC area
Posts: 14,751
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 145 Post(s)
Liked: 440
You might want to begin Mike L. with seeing if you can replicate Stereo Review's tests a number of years ago. If you want a copy of the article, PM me and I'll send it along to you.

"I've found that when you want to know the truth about someone that someone is probably the last person you should ask." - Gregory House
Chu Gai is online now  
post #199 of 384 Old 11-24-2007, 08:45 AM
Newbie
 
nuhi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 6
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
mike, thanks for this eye opener.
Seems to me that now your 'sighted ego' is screaming even though you will not acknowledge it. Maybe you received a few emails from the angry marketing people.
Even if you hear the difference after some practicing I bet it will not be the question which is better or worse, it will just be something like "oh this other one sounds a little darker, but I'm not sure". Then if that darker one turns out to be a Monster cable you could say it masks some details but if it is a Transparent cable you could say it is more musical.

No pun intended but I seriously think it is time to get over this cable nonsense and start working on some new room correction and speaker ideas, that's where the biggest and measurable distortions are.
nuhi is offline  
post #200 of 384 Old 11-24-2007, 01:40 PM
AVS Special Member
 
krabapple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: in a state bordered by Kentucky and Maine
Posts: 5,276
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 113 Post(s)
Liked: 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutgar View Post


So, could I pick out the MIT's in blind test? I don't know, I haven't tried.

It sounds like you should be able to. In fact your stories sound a lot like Mike's. Before he did a blind comparison.
krabapple is offline  
post #201 of 384 Old 11-24-2007, 01:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
krabapple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: in a state bordered by Kentucky and Maine
Posts: 5,276
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 113 Post(s)
Liked: 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike lavigne View Post

[b]
i certainly put cable subjectivists (much more) on the defensive

But from a scientific/engineer POV -- scientists are 'objectivists' by avocation -- that's where they should be. Cable subjectivists tend to be WAY too confident that what they've 'heard', is real.
krabapple is offline  
post #202 of 384 Old 11-24-2007, 02:22 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Rutgar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 5,446
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by krabapple View Post

It sounds like you should be able to. In fact your stories sound a lot like Mike's. Before he did a blind comparison.

Krabapple, as usual you take one single sentence out of an entire body of text and completely skew the point.

I have already said several times that I don't put much stock in such tests. Especially the way the one Mike's and Chris's was done. And I stated quite clearly why I picked the cables I'm using, and how I furthur reinforced my decision in doing so. I've tried to give you the benefit of the doubt in most of this discussion, but I'm really beginning to think that your only purpose here is to antagonize.

Rutgar is offline  
post #203 of 384 Old 11-24-2007, 03:11 PM
AVS Special Member
 
FrantzM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Southeast FL, USA
Posts: 2,071
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutgar View Post

Krabapple, as usual you take one single sentence out of an entire body of text and completely skew the point.
..........
but I'm really beginning to think that your only purpose here is to antagonize.

Rutgar

So true... I want to congratulate MikeL and Chris Wiggles for being class acts. While this test IMHO is not conclusive. it serves the purpose for the subjectivists, including myself to spend our money in a wiser fashion. I know for example that my next purchase won't be cables... The ones I have are good and expensive enough

Frantz
FrantzM is offline  
post #204 of 384 Old 11-24-2007, 07:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Milt99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: West Of California
Posts: 5,116
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Liked: 70
FWIW, I think this thread should be relocated here:

 

It ain't ignorance causes so much trouble; it's folks knowing so much that ain't so

Milt99 is offline  
post #205 of 384 Old 11-25-2007, 12:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dizzman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 5,251
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
All that was proved by the test was that mikes overwhelming confidence was a bit misplaced.

Hyperbole can now drop to subtleties as opposed to dramatic improvements.

Beyond that, nothing has been proven.

So can we move past arguing about what was ar was not proven?

Proud Daddy to Anastasia and Christopher.
Born October 26 2005.

Ob was the delivery doc.

Since i cannot rant on a soapbox in the town square...
http://commonsensehasdied.blogspot.com/
Dizzman is offline  
post #206 of 384 Old 11-25-2007, 04:20 PM
AVS Special Member
 
krabapple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: in a state bordered by Kentucky and Maine
Posts: 5,276
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 113 Post(s)
Liked: 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutgar View Post

Krabapple, as usual you take one single sentence out of an entire body of text and completely skew the point.

Well, I *could* have critiqued every one of your anecdotes in that post, but you'd surely have considered that an act of antagonism. So, instead I cut to the chase, and now I'm accused of skewing your point. The point is that you're confident you heard differences between the MITs and others....under non-DBT conditions. (As was Mike, I noted) And you're not confident you could do so under controlled conditions. (But if the differences are as real as you believe, you should be able to, I noted).

Quote:


I have already said several times that I don't put much stock in such tests. Especially the way the one Mike's and Chris's was done.

Please clarify...by 'such tests' do you mean DBT generally? Or do you mean only DBTs that aren't done a certain way?

Quote:


And I stated quite clearly why I picked the cables I'm using, and how I furthur reinforced my decision in doing so.

Yes, indeed you did, and nothing I wrote 'skewed' that to be other than what it was. I trust you understand why the anecdotes you offered don't constitute good evidence?

Quote:


I've tried to give you the benefit of the doubt in most of this discussion, but I'm really beginning to think that your only purpose here is to antagonize.

Please , don't give me the benefit of doubt. I assure you I will always be skeptical of anecdotal evidence such as you posted, for claims of cable difference. If you - or anyone -- is going to post such such anecdotes as evidence that cables sound different, you can expect some commentary on a thread about cable testing.
krabapple is offline  
post #207 of 384 Old 11-25-2007, 10:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
CharlesJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,229
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 81 Post(s)
Liked: 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutgar View Post

But like I said before, I also want to let the dust settle on the current test performed by Mike and Chris.

You mean the pressure that test caused you needs to subside?
CharlesJ is offline  
post #208 of 384 Old 11-26-2007, 01:46 AM
Advanced Member
 
terry j's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 14
I have a (probably very stupid) question regarding the swapping of cables, and as the time factor has come up more than once there is some link there.

Why do we need to swap cables at BOTH ends?? Could we not have two runs of the cable joined at a common end, for sake of argument the amp end, with only one pair plugged inat any one time?

I bet the answer will be something like 'you need to have the amp off before you change cables' but, hey I dont!! Admittedly I use Speakons and even if the music is playing I have no worries about unplugging the speakon to whatever driver I wish.

So, what basic and stupid oversight am I making? In any case it would only speed up the process a tiny bit so even from that angle it could be a stupid idea.
terry j is offline  
post #209 of 384 Old 11-26-2007, 05:07 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Chu Gai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NYC area
Posts: 14,751
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 145 Post(s)
Liked: 440
Quote:


Why do we need to swap cables at BOTH ends?? Could we not have two runs of the cable joined at a common end, for sake of argument the amp end, with only one pair plugged inat any one time?

Sure, but it'd be easier and cut down on time lag to have both runs end at the speakers and do the switching at the amp.

"I've found that when you want to know the truth about someone that someone is probably the last person you should ask." - Gregory House
Chu Gai is online now  
post #210 of 384 Old 11-26-2007, 07:35 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Michael Grant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 10,239
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
If your amp and speaker terminals made it possible to cleanly connect both wires to both ends at the same time, then you could avoid having to power down by always having at least one speaker cable connected. That is, connect both, then remove one; connect both, remove the other, etc.

Michael
Michael Grant is offline  
Reply Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+)

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off