Lets talk AntiCables...;) - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-24-2013, 09:11 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mcnarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 6,190
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 125 Post(s)
Liked: 327
Quote:
The 2 cents remark means my opinion...I'm not selling anything...your post is weird
It was an insult. Sorry I wasn't clearer. wink.gif

If you can't explain how it works, you can't say it doesn't.—The High-End Creed

mcnarus is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 02-24-2013, 09:24 AM
AVS Special Member
 
JHAz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,044
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 119 Post(s)
Liked: 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by josh6113 View Post

If I had the extra money I would be glad to send you a stereo pair but sadly I do not...I used my taxes for a few goodies...smile.gif..a blind test in itself is flawed...the reasons why are for someone who knows how the brain works to explain. You don't have to be blindfolded...the setup can be behind a screen or curtain with 2 sets of wires hooked into a switch so you can go back and forth rather quickly.People want a blind test because it tips the tables in the non believers favor.Do you listen at home blindfolded?...of course not...there are other ways to test without knowing what is being done...just my 2 cents...smile.gif

actually the PhDs and scientists who actually understand how the brain works and have experienced the flaws of testing know that sighted tests (or tests where the subject knows what he's getting) don't work. nN fact, the human brain and subconscious communication are so freaking powerful that in order to acurately test whether a new drubg works as expected, you not only don't tell the patients whether they're getting a real drug or a placebo, you don't thell the Doc administering the drugs, either. That's called double-blind and its necessary because (assuming we're all humans on this bus) we communicate things by tiny signals that are uncontrollable so that no matter how many PhDs you pile up or in what fields, if you are administering the test and know which is the placebo and which is not you will unavoidably tip off the patients and skew the results. That's real stuff.
JHAz is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 09:31 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
josh6113's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Columbus,Ohio
Posts: 708
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHAz View Post

actually the PhDs and scientists who actually understand how the brain works and have experienced the flaws of testing know that sighted tests (or tests where the subject knows what he's getting) don't work. nN fact, the human brain and subconscious communication are so freaking powerful that in order to acurately test whether a new drubg works as expected, you not only don't tell the patients whether they're getting a real drug or a placebo, you don't thell the Doc administering the drugs, either. That's called double-blind and its necessary because (assuming we're all humans on this bus) we communicate things by tiny signals that are uncontrollable so that no matter how many PhDs you pile up or in what fields, if you are administering the test and know which is the placebo and which is not you will unavoidably tip off the patients and skew the results. That's real stuff.
You missed my point in saying the test can still be hidden without being blindfolded...can be done behind a curtain or wall where as the people won't SEE what is being done WITHOUT being blinded.

Doing what I do best...LIVIN!
josh6113 is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 09:33 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
josh6113's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Columbus,Ohio
Posts: 708
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnarus View Post

It was an insult. Sorry I wasn't clearer. wink.gif
You must of felt threatened if insulting me seemed right to you...I don't insult anyone...if you continue I'll send a message to the mods regarding your behavior... Keep it civil and clean without the insults...thank you...back on topic.

Doing what I do best...LIVIN!
josh6113 is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 09:42 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mcnarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 6,190
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 125 Post(s)
Liked: 327
Quote:
You must of felt threatened if insulting me seemed right to you.
Threatened? Not hardly. The idea was to prompt you to wonder why people might see you as an object of ridicule. Three solid pages of corrections and explanations obviously haven't gotten through to you, so I figured why not try shame?

It's all in the interest of education, friend. When you're ready to be receptive, let us know.

If you can't explain how it works, you can't say it doesn't.—The High-End Creed

mcnarus is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 09:44 AM
AVS Special Member
 
BIslander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 8,594
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 92 Post(s)
Liked: 135
josh6113 - You seem to be unaware that most of the posts here are now of a somewhat insulting nature. It became clear fairly early on in the life of this thread that you had nothing to offer beyond the two beliefs stated in the OP and that you would reject any substantive discussion. So, it looks like people are now having a bit of fun at your expense. Thought you should know.

PS: It's why I suggested the thread be closed.
BIslander is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 09:51 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
josh6113's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Columbus,Ohio
Posts: 708
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnarus View Post

Threatened? Not hardly. The idea was to prompt you to wonder why people might see you as an object of ridicule. Three solid pages of corrections and explanations obviously haven't gotten through to you, so I figured why not try shame?

It's all in the interest of education, friend. When you're ready to be receptive, let us know.
I'm receptive to everyone...what people are posting is opinion not fact...same as I'm doing...shurely you can post without bashing or insults...if you don't want to involve yourself with this topic don't continue to post...easy...thanks

Doing what I do best...LIVIN!
josh6113 is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 09:54 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mcnarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 6,190
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 125 Post(s)
Liked: 327
Quote:
I'm receptive to everyone...what people are posting is opinion not fact...same as I'm doing.
No. Some people are posting facts. You are too ill-informed to recognize the difference.
SimpleTheater likes this.

If you can't explain how it works, you can't say it doesn't.—The High-End Creed

mcnarus is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 09:59 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
josh6113's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Columbus,Ohio
Posts: 708
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by BIslander View Post

josh6113 - You seem to be unaware that most of the posts here are now of a somewhat insulting nature. It became clear fairly early on in the life of this thread that you had nothing to offer beyond the two beliefs stated in the OP and that you would reject any substantive discussion. So, it looks like people are now having a bit of fun at your expense. Thought you should know.

PS: It's why I suggested the thread be closed.
Thank you...I can read...and my thread was closed on bluray forum because of insults...it was reopened because I proved my case to the mods and it was reopened....the mod then told everyone to keep it clean...and it has...no reason for insults...people seem to get irritated because they offer so called proof and opinion thay state as fact...and if no one agrees they offer insults...one FACT is no one had tried the anticable in his or her system so how does anyone know what im stating is false...other than offer there opinion that no one ever does.Im not out to prove anything just offering my findings and OPINION...like the other posters posting there OPINION.

Doing what I do best...LIVIN!
josh6113 is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 10:00 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
josh6113's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Columbus,Ohio
Posts: 708
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnarus View Post

No. Some people are posting facts. You are too ill-informed to recognize the difference.
And I've agreed with the facts...not with the opinions.

Doing what I do best...LIVIN!
josh6113 is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 11:03 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,387
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 763 Post(s)
Liked: 1178
Quote:
Originally Posted by josh6113 View Post

a blind test in itself is flawed...the reasons why are for someone who knows how the brain works to explain.

Are you saying that all people who are up to date with current scientific knowledge about how the brain works reject blind tests?
Quote:
You don't have to be blindfolded...the setup can be behind a screen or curtain with 2 sets of wires hooked into a switch so you can go back and forth rather quickly.

Seems like a blind test. I thought that those were flawed. Why are you suggesting one?
Quote:
People want a blind test because it tips the tables in the non believers favor.

How do you suggest that sighted bias be dealt with?
Quote:
Do you listen at home blindfolded?

Of course not, and I don't use blindfolds when I do DBTs. AFAIK, nobody does!
arnyk is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 11:09 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
josh6113's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Columbus,Ohio
Posts: 708
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnpoil= 
Are you saying that all people who are up to date with current scientific knowledge about how the brain works reject blind tests?
Seems like a blind test. I thought that those were flawed. Why are you suggesting one?
How do you suggest that sighted bias be dealt with?
Of course not, and I don't use blindfolds when I do DBTs. AFAIK, nobody does!
Not at all...my point was you don't need cloth over your eyes for a blind test...but as I've stated blind tests don't prove or disprove anything...if they did we would have alot more proof of many things if it was a definitive test without flaws.

Doing what I do best...LIVIN!
josh6113 is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 11:09 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,387
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 763 Post(s)
Liked: 1178
Quote:
Originally Posted by josh6113 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnarus View Post

No. Some people are posting facts. You are too ill-informed to recognize the difference.
And I've agreed with the facts...not with the opinions.

Do you agree with these facts?

(1) A loudspeaker is an electrical network.

(2) A loudspeaker cable is an electrical network.

(3) The electrical changes to an audio signal due to various cables providing a signal to a loudspeaker can be both predicted from measurements of the speaker and the cable electrical parameters, and also measured.

(4) It is well known which electrical changes are large and of a kind that are audible, and which electrical changes are small and of a kind that is not audible.

(5) In general the electrical changes that we either predict or observe with well-chosen cables and speakers are small and of a kind that is not audible.

(6) There have been (non blindfolded) carefully designed listening tests that optimized listener sensitivity, minimized the effects of listener bias and found no audible differences when reasonable speaker cables were compared.
arnyk is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 11:14 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,387
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 763 Post(s)
Liked: 1178
Quote:
Originally Posted by josh6113 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnpoil= 
Are you saying that all people who are up to date with current scientific knowledge about how the brain works reject blind tests?
Seems like a blind test. I thought that those were flawed. Why are you suggesting one?
How do you suggest that sighted bias be dealt with?
Of course not, and I don't use blindfolds when I do DBTs. AFAIK, nobody does!
Not at all...my point was you don't need cloth over your eyes for a blind test...

AFAIK nobody who is familair with how blind tests of audio components has ever used a cloth over their eyes. That means that your point was a straw man argument.
Quote:
but as I've stated blind tests don't prove or disprove anything...

That puts you into disagreement with modern science.

If blind tests can't help prove or disprove anything, why are they so widely used, and even demanded by certain laws?
Quote:
if they did we would have alot more proof of many things if it was a definitive test without flaws.

What sort of proof do we lack?
arnyk is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 11:23 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
josh6113's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Columbus,Ohio
Posts: 708
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

AFAIK nobody who is familair with how blind tests of audio components has ever used a cloth over their eyes. That means that your point was a straw man argument.
That puts you into disagreement with modern science.

If blind tests can't help prove or disprove anything, why are they so widely used, and even demanded by certain laws?
What sort of proof do we lack?
The proof is that you cannot believe I am hearing a difference...and since were on the topic of all of these truthful double blind tests being accurate...please post the findings so others can see your reference. And show me a test with one cable being tested against the anti cable and then we can have more to go on.I would like to read your references to your post regarding the tests...sounds like a fun read...smile.gif

Doing what I do best...LIVIN!
josh6113 is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 11:34 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Ivan Beaver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,647
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by josh6113 View Post

.People want a blind test because it tips the tables in the non believers favor.Do you listen at home blindfolded?...of course not...there are other ways to test without knowing what is being done...just my 2 cents...smile.gif
OK-then PLEASE answer these 2 questions.

How about at test of TOTAL believers is a particular product-in this case YOU (and whoever else you know) and the cables in question.

The test is cable 1and 2 (you don't know which one is yours). Different tests are done and switched-sometimes the same cables is switched in 3 or 4 times in a row- All you know is that the test "positions" are A-Z.

As eadh position is played- you write down which cable you think it is-1 or 2. When the test is over=you compare your answers to the person doing the switching (who you did not see during the tests.

In order for the cables to be better-you should be able to pick out "your" cables ever time they are played. it may be 3 times or 20 times or 13 times-who knows- during the test.

If you can't pick them them out-then there is no difference.

Would you be willing to do such a test.

BTW I was part of a similar test years ago with some audio professionals. We were listening for the different between two different products. Many people heard a difference. HOWEVER-nothing was ever changed or switched out. Just the signal stopped-and we were lead to believe that something was switched. But all they did was turn it back on again.

It is REAL easy to fool the ear.

QUESTION 2

What are the other ways to test?

Danley Sound Labs

Physics-not fads
Ivan Beaver is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 11:41 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
josh6113's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Columbus,Ohio
Posts: 708
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
http://www.avforums.com/forums/interconnects-speaker-cables-switches/755673-results-speaker-cable-experiments-shocked-me.html

Here is a test done by someone...:note he didn't use anti cable but magnet wire...anti cable is similar but not common magnet wire


Here is a link with many tests done...interesting to read

http://www.head-fi.org/t/486598/testing-audiophile-claims-and-myths

An interesting cable test


http://www.avreview.co.uk/news/article/mps/uan/1863#ixzz0nGpGRfCB

Doing what I do best...LIVIN!
josh6113 is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 12:00 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
josh6113's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Columbus,Ohio
Posts: 708
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Also in my opinion in order to hear a difference the test needs to be rather fast with the content played.The mind processes information so quickly that playing a song or movie for minutes not seconds people won't be able to tell much of a difference...but if a test was done with say a 5 to 10 second clip of a song or movie and being blind to the switching or not of a cable I bet you would get better results via the test...but I've not seen such a test...just ones that play well over a minute then they switch or don't...by then the mind has already forgotten and needs to hear once more...this is my opinion on a test that would be more on the right track...smile.gif

Doing what I do best...LIVIN!
josh6113 is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 12:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
BIslander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 8,594
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 92 Post(s)
Liked: 135
Did you read the links you posted. I checked the first two. The first was completely uncontrolled, the same as your experience. A guy buys some cable, tries it, and says it sounds better. The second was an interesting compilation of links to dozens of "tests". Here's the conclusion from the author of that compilation:
Quote:
The clear conclusion is that ABX testing does not back up many audiophile claims, so they become audiophile myths as they show cables do not inherantly change sound. Any change in sound quality comes from the listeners mind and interaction between their senses. What is claimed to be audible is not reliably so.
SimpleTheater likes this.
BIslander is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 12:15 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,387
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 763 Post(s)
Liked: 1178
Quote:
Originally Posted by josh6113 View Post

The proof is that you cannot believe I am hearing a difference..

Where did I say that?
Quote:
and since were on the topic of all of these truthful double blind tests being accurate.

Where did I say that, taking special notice of the word all.?

BTW, why are you dodging post #103?
arnyk is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 12:23 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
josh6113's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Columbus,Ohio
Posts: 708
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by BIslander View Post

Did you read the links you posted. I checked the first two. The first was completely uncontrolled, the same as your experience. A guy buys some cable, tries it, and says it sounds better. The second was an interesting compilation of links to dozens of "tests". Here's the conclusion from the author of that compilation:
Do you notice in that conclusion it states:Many... Not all...smile.gif..and you didn't quote the whole conclusion..only a small piece to get your point across...here is the whole conclusion:

The clear conclusion is that ABX testing does not back up many audiophile claims, so they become audiophile myths as they show cables do not inherantly change sound. Any change in sound quality comes from the listeners mind and interaction between their senses. What is claimed to be audible is not reliably so. Blind testing is also sometimes passed off as ABX. But blind testing is not really testing, it is a review of a product without seeing it, and that allows claims to be made about sound which have not been verified.
 
If hifi is all about sound and more specifically sound quality, then we should, once the other senses have been removed be able to hear differences which can be verified by being able to identify one product from another by only listening. But time and agian we cannot.
 
So you can either buy good but inexpensive hifi products such as cables, amps, CDPs and be satisfied that the sound they produce is superb. You do need to spend time with speakers as they really do sound identifiably different. Or you can buy expensive hifi products such as cable tec and luxuriate in the build and image and identify one hifi from another by looks and sound. But you cannot buy expensive and identify it from cheap by sound alone.

It also states that blind testing is not really testing...and of course you will say that about my first link...even though not me but another person heard a difference...you also didn't talk at all about the third link I posted...why is that?... Well for one they did hear differences it just seems your not willing to accept that outcome.You did however reference my first 2 links and I see why.

Doing what I do best...LIVIN!
josh6113 is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 12:25 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
josh6113's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Columbus,Ohio
Posts: 708
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

Where did I say that?
Where did I say that, taking special notice of the word all.?

BTW, why are you dodging post #103?
Then let me ask...do you think what I'm hearing is false?...if so my post is accurate...and what did I supposedly dodge?

Oh I agree with 1-4 not 5 or 6... And as I asked a few posts up where is that info coming from...but you dodged me on that and didn't post your info.

Doing what I do best...LIVIN!
josh6113 is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 01:41 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Ivan Beaver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,647
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by josh6113 View Post

But blind testing is not really testing, it is a review of a product without seeing it, and that allows claims to be made about sound which have not been verified.
 
If hifi is all about sound and more specifically sound quality, then we should, once the other senses have been removed be able to hear differences which can be verified by being able to identify one product from another by only listening. But time and agian we cannot.
 
.
So NOW you admit that it is hard to tell the difference-unless you SEE the product being used?

Then why not just say that in the original post-"I like the way these cables look". NOT for the way they sound

DON'T talk about the "sound" when you cannot hear it.

Sure it is fine to pay more for cables if they "look cool"-but let's not confuse that they ALSO "sound better"-which has yet to be proven.

Danley Sound Labs

Physics-not fads
Ivan Beaver is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 01:51 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
josh6113's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Columbus,Ohio
Posts: 708
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivan Beaver View Post

So NOW you admit that it is hard to tell the difference-unless you SEE the product being used?

Then why not just say that in the original post-"I like the way these cables look". NOT for the way they sound

DON'T talk about the "sound" when you cannot hear it.

Sure it is fine to pay more for cables if they "look cool"-but let's not confuse that they ALSO "sound better"-which has yet to be proven.
That was a quote and based on opinion...you act like you caught me in something...lol...and I never admited it was hard to tell the difference...but differences are there none the less...read this:

http://www.avreview.co.uk/news/article/mps/uan/1863#ixzz0nGpGRfCB

Doing what I do best...LIVIN!
josh6113 is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 02:08 PM
AVS Special Member
 
BIslander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 8,594
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 92 Post(s)
Liked: 135
This is really quite pointless. Josh6113 has demonstrated an astonishing lack of knowledge and clearly has no interest in learning. He just wants to argue. I think everyone here will agree that he personally hears a difference. Since no one else has his ears and life experience or his equipment or listens in his room, there's nothing else to say.
BIslander is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 02:10 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Chu Gai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NYC area
Posts: 14,969
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 319 Post(s)
Liked: 596
Quote:
Originally Posted by josh6113 View Post

That was a quote and based on opinion...you act like you caught me in something...lol...and I never admited it was hard to tell the difference...but differences are there none the less...read this:

http://www.avreview.co.uk/news/article/mps/uan/1863#ixzz0nGpGRfCB
Apart from a lack of sufficient documentation it appears that an inadequate number of trials were performed rendering any conclusions without merit.

"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  
Old 02-24-2013, 02:21 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,387
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 763 Post(s)
Liked: 1178
Quote:
Originally Posted by josh6113 View Post


The clear conclusion is that ABX testing does not back up many audiophile claims, so they become audiophile myths as they show cables do not inherantly change sound.

Agreed.
Quote:
Any change in sound quality comes from the listeners mind and interaction between their senses.

I don't agree with the "any". Many changes in sound quality come from the poor quality of the tests that naive audiophiles perform. Most such tests are performed by means of manually swapping cables. It takes 10 or more seconds to swap a set of cables under the most ideal conditions. In that time period two things have happened:

(1) The music being listened to progresses through the natural changes that happen all the time in music, and it becomes a somewhat different piece of music. The last thing listened to was a verse and now we are listening to a chorus. The intensity of the music builds and enough time has passed for it to build up significantly. It's a different verse. The pace may have changed.

(2) As others have pointed out, our brains only maintain a detailed image of sound for a few seconds at the very most. So now our sonic comparison of cable A to cable B becomes a comparison between faded memory and a fresh memory. This might be the "change in sound quality (that) comes from the listener's mind" mentioned above, but to me it is more of a change in sensation than a change in perception.
Quote:
What is claimed to be audible is not reliably so

Agreed. Another meaning of the phrase "change in sound quality (that) comes from the listener's mind" may have taken place. Things like self-affirmation. The excitement of believing that a significant change has been made.
Quote:
Blind testing is also sometimes passed off as ABX. But blind testing is not really testing, it is a review of a product without seeing it, and that allows claims to be made about sound which have not been verified.

I think you may be referring to the confusion that some people have over the word test A test involves a comparison to a reliable and fixed reference. This implies a back-and-forth comparison between two items or experiences. Most audiophiles seem to do one-way evaluations. They have their old system, they change something, and then they give a review of what they think has changed based on their memory (which I have already shown to be inherently defective) of their old system. There is no reliable fixed reference that they are comparing the new system to.
Quote:
 If hifi is all about sound and more specifically sound quality, then we should, once the other senses have been removed be able to hear differences which can be verified by being able to identify one product from another by only listening. But time and again we cannot.

Agreed.
Quote:
So you can either buy good but inexpensive hifi products such as cables, amps, CDPs and be satisfied that the sound they produce is superb. You do need to spend time with speakers as they really do sound identifiably different. Or you can buy expensive hifi products such as cable tech and luxuriate in the build and image and identify one hifi from another by looks and sound. But you cannot buy expensive and identify it from cheap by sound alone.

I agree that speakers are among the last areas where you can spend more money wisely, and get better sound. It still costs money to build a powerful subwoofer, for example.
arnyk is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 02:35 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
josh6113's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Columbus,Ohio
Posts: 708
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by BIslander View Post

This is really quite pointless. Josh6113 has demonstrated an astonishing lack of knowledge and clearly has no interest in learning. He just wants to argue. I think everyone here will agree that he personally hears a difference. Since no one else has his ears and life experience or his equipment or listens in his room, there's nothing else to say.
There is no argueing just debate...and I see you still won't address my third link I posted.

Doing what I do best...LIVIN!
josh6113 is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 02:45 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,387
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 763 Post(s)
Liked: 1178
Quote:
Originally Posted by josh6113 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

Where did I say that?
Where did I say that, taking special notice of the word all.?

BTW, why are you dodging post #103?

Then let me ask...do you think what I'm hearing is false?

I explain how you can hear actual differences that are still not what they seem in post #117.
Quote:
...if so my post is accurate...and what did I supposedly dodge?

If you don't quote my posts at all, its hard for me to tell what you are responding to.
Quote:
Oh I agree with 1-4 not 5 or 6...


Just to refresh our memories, here are the items that you don't think are facts:

(5) In general the electrical changes that we either predict or observe with well-chosen cables and speakers are small and of a kind that is not audible.

(6) There have been (non blindfolded) carefully designed listening tests that optimized listener sensitivity, minimized the effects of listener bias and found no audible differences when reasonable speaker cables were compared.
Quote:
And as I asked a few posts up where is that info coming from...but you dodged me on that and didn't post your info.

Like I said, your posts seem to be light on quoting, and without quoting (absent here as well) it is hard to see the things you claim you said. Quoting is considered by many to be part of good manners while conferencing, because without it, it is easy to get lost.

But to answer your questions.

(5) Determining the electrical changes or losses in a speaker cable (for example) is a kind of a thing that is a common exercise in electrical engineering. That takes things like calculus, analytic geometry, and complex numbers to explain. This article sticks closer to things like arithmetic and algebra: http://www.audioholics.com/education/cables/speaker-cable-gauge as does this one: http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/audio/part7/page1.html

(6) Others have posted links and if those don't satisfy, I know of a few more. For example much of the original discussion is not online, but some published comments on it can be found here: http://www.stereophile.com/historical/1283cable/
SimpleTheater likes this.
arnyk is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 02:47 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
josh6113's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Columbus,Ohio
Posts: 708
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

Agreed.
I don't agree with the "any". Many changes in sound quality come from the poor quality of the tests that naive audiophiles perform. Most such tests are performed by means of manually swapping cables. It takes 10 or more seconds to swap a set of cables under the most ideal conditions. In that time period two things have happened:

(1) The music being listened to progresses through the natural changes that happen all the time in music, and it becomes a somewhat different piece of music. The last thing listened to was a verse and now we are listening to a chorus. The intensity of the music builds and enough time has passed for it to build up significantly. It's a different verse. The pace may have changed.

(2) As others have pointed out, our brains only maintain a detailed image of sound for a few seconds at the very most. So now our sonic comparison of cable A to cable B becomes a comparison between faded memory and a fresh memory. This might be the "change in sound quality (that) comes from the listener's mind" mentioned above, but to me it is more of a change in sensation than a change in perception.
Agreed. Another meaning of the phrase "change in sound quality (that) comes from the listener's mind" may have taken place. Things like self-affirmation. The excitement of believing that a significant change has been made.
I think you may be referring to the confusion that some people have over the word test A test involves a comparison to a reliable and fixed reference. This implies a back-and-forth comparison between two items or experiences. Most audiophiles seem to do one-way evaluations. They have their old system, they change something, and then they give a review of what they think has changed based on their memory (which I have already shown to be inherently defective) of their old system. There is no reliable fixed reference that they are comparing the new system to.
Agreed.
I agree that speakers are among the last areas where you can spend more money wisely, and get better sound. It still costs money to build a powerful subwoofer, for example.
Sure we can pick apart that conclusion from one source...doesn't mean anything...and topics like this start simple enough but ALWAYS go the way of long drawnout science claims and speculation....instead let's get to the basics of this thread...try the anti cable in your own system and compare it to what your using now...use any material you wish and post your findings here...I am talking about one cable...the anti cable...not cables in general...and not blind or double blind tests...all we have been doing is going back and forth not proving anything and we can debate this till were blue in the face. If there is anyone who wants to do this and post his or her findings then great...but sadly I bet no one will...the point is how the anti cable does in your system compared to what your using now.That is the challenge.

Doing what I do best...LIVIN!
josh6113 is offline  
 
Thread Tools


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