Let's be cautious not to roll fringe practices in with simple cable swaps. The two issues are completely different, with different types of people taking heed to one over the other.
When you seemingly defy the laws of physics... you are on the fringe. there is not an exotic out there that can point to any science that improves performance in or near to the audible band. Not to be putting somethign out htere that might be out of context, but Mike L was swearing up and down that he could tel lthe differences between his exotics and Monster. when sighted he sure could, as could others in the room. When sight was removed from the test... then suddently we were at the same odds as chance.
I challenge you to point to a well-known cable company that's having trouble making money my friend.
I have never claimed that they are not making money hand over fist. hell if i was looking for a business to start, one where you can charge whatever you want and you need provide no proof whatsoever of its benefits and any science can be made up by monkeys at a typewriter seems to be a good one.
I said that IF they could show that they actually did something and could be solidly identified in a real test as superior... look at how much they COULD make.
What you blindly fail to understand is that
only when a change is really obvious do the raves come in.
THis is a red herring. in almost EVERY SINGLE CASE, when these same improvements are subjected to a test where bias is removed... they dissapear. argue all you want, but your statement is purely opinion. Mine is fact. And please, if i am wrong, point to a test with even moderate to mild controls in place where somebody ANYBODY identified something exotic.
If you cannot, then we are back to the argument about how no blind test is needed because it is so obvious a deaf man could identify it. And that one, is flat out wrong.