Originally Posted by drblank
You have published articles that prove that there is no difference in the sound quality of a cable in an audio system?
Why are you asking me for that? Obviously, you haven't even read what I've written, and you have no idea what I've written here or anywhere else. You're just wasting reams of electrons calling me names, contradicting me without even thinking, and now obviously not even reading what I've written.
Tell you what, why don't you find where I said there is no difference in the sound of any cable. Good luck with that. Really. Let us, while you attempt that, notice that I have pointed out one (albeit extreme) example where cables did make a difference, IN THIS THREAD
. Your question is claiming that I hold a position that I have specifically neither stated nor implied.
Furthermore, in professional applications there are certainly issues, ranging from cable capacitance vs. driver circuits, to shielding, to balanced twist, to inductance for low-impedence cables, and so on.
Not as much in most stereos, BUT there are some speakers with really, really wild-*** impedence for which the size of speaker cables, for one example. I did mention that a ways upthread, too, so what is this straw man of yours, anyhow?
Why? Why did you make that up?
I've said your problems with testing are misguided.
I've said your talking about harmonic structure, etc, is poorly informed at best.
I've said you have shown no evidence of qualifications to evaluate an ABX test, or frankly, any other audio test.
I've said that you need to learn what positive and negative controls are.
I've said you're spewing acre-feet of codswallop.
I've said you don't know the difference between math and science.
I've said you have no idea what the word "theory" means.
I've said that mathematics do not "prove" theories. Math is a tool.
I've said that theories are not "proven", they are 'accepted' based on the best available understanding, despite your seeming ideas otherwise. (I will stipulate you were not very clear in your assumptions in that regard.)
I've said that there is no evidence that anyone, at least anyone of at least normal skills and cognition, can avoid a blind test, and succeed with a sighted test accurately for the SOUND. You claim otherwise for yourself. I don't believe it. You need to prove otherwise, and yes, that will involve blind testing.
I've said you can prefer anything you want. I will say now, however, that preference ends at your nose. When you claim "that cable sounds different" you've passed beyond your preference, and now it's a testable issue, so now we need evidence. If you claim 'I like that', well, you could be lying, but I frankly don't care, you can like whatever you bloody well want to AS LONG AS IT DOES NOT GO PAST YOUR NOSE.
I will now point out in your last polemic that you DEMAND that one accept your premise, then you attempt to prove your premise, having demanded acceptance. That's a circular argument. Sorry. Wrong. I could dismember the fuzzy thinking, equivocation, circularities, false premises, etc, in your writing, but frankly, you don't care and don't seem motivated to learn from them, so I am not a-gonna bother.
In none of that is contained a claim that no cable makes a difference, never ever. That's not even a provable claim, since you phrased it as a universal negative.