2-Channel Analog Interconnects/Speaker Cables - Page 4

This statement:

Does not match this statement:

measurement equipment is far more accurate then your ear. You have zero education on measurements too so you have no real opinion on it!

Post when you can tell me where any null exists and speaker repositioning is need, when your speaker has a dip on a 30 degree angle (toe in might be needed) or when you 3rd harmonics are above the audible threshold (better get a better speaker). I could go on with this but you either refuse to understand or you get what Im saying.

Sure I will give you 1% but I guess you guys forgot about doing the 99% well because 1. your speakers are not that great relative to your $$$ spent on electronics, 2. your rooms generally have huge flaws. I would recommend working more on the 99% so that they 1% will actually matter.


Here is the rub

-speaker wire starting at .50 ft PRESERVES the original waveform.
-ICs starting at < $1 a foot PRESERVES the original waveform.

I doubt you could remotely give any proof that those two do not?

Of course you like the end response. You are a perfect subjective/placebo case. I like every product I buy, that doesnt mean squat in terms of if its scientifiically better.

Your cables never improved squat, you buying them improved your outlook on your system.


There is one big difference between us, you have this "belief", I simply have educated myself and proved every choice I make in audio.

If you have ever used scientific instrumentation, you know that if you repeat an experiment many times with identical conditions, you will get slightly different results each time. This is due to the intrinsic error of the measuring device. What I am suggesting is that differences that cables make on an audio measurement may lie within the error bars of the equipment. This would explain why it often takes listening over an extended period of time to notice the difference between cables. Our brain is averaging out the noise, so to speak. I am not proclaiming this hypothesis as fact, only as a likely cause for what I know I perceive.

Anyway, let's chill out with all the negativity around here. We all supposedly love audio and have different perspectives on what leads to the sound we enjoy. And we are all at different stages in our pursuit of this hobby and with different financial resources. I'm happy to respect others' perspectives - would be nice to have it recipricated .

Do the DTBs, educate yourself on the science of audio then you can debate the merits of Kimbre cables or whatever expensive brand you use.

THe old tag line "I like what I hear" is pointless in any discussion beacuse it holds zero scientific weight.

I can measure my speakers 100 times and I will get the same response, if I do not change anything in room. Measurement mics and software can easily filter out ANY noise outside of the log sweeps so I have even done measurements with music running on other speakers.

Have you ever done in room measurements? what measurement equipment do you own?

To think that measurements will lie you to is just bogus banter. Think about it, if you can hear the difference in a cable...

Example 1.
"That cable had more bass" then there is going to be atleast a +1dB shift in the frequency plot somewhere in the lower frequencies. If there isnt then its IMPOSSIBLE for there to be a difference in bass.

Example 2.
"My speakers have a bigger sound stage" Then there is going to be a change in the polar response curves. If there isnt then its IMPOSSIBLE for speakers to have a bigger sound stage.

This is the simple truth, there is nothing around it. Speaker designers measure constantly to pefect their speakers so that means measurement equipment is far more accurate then anyone's ears.

Which is more likely?

1. Accurate measurement equipment that allows someone to build accurate speakers is not accurate when measuring speaker reponse change in room
2. People hear a difference but measurement show there was no difference, conclusion that person has been dupped by Placebo effects.

You can suggest it all you want. All it tells me is that you are entirely ignorant of human auditory acuity. The margin of error for measurements relevant to cabling are many MANY orders of magnitude more precise than our hearing capabilities.


No, only as a logically plausible but entirely ignorant suggestion that is not sustainable.


No, I'm sorry, I will not respect deliberate misrepresentation of facts. Everyone is entitled to their own OPINIONS, not their own set of facts. It is abundantly clear that we have the ability to measure cabling performance to a FAR more precise degree than our auditory capabilities. It's really no contest how much more precise we can measure. And for you to come here and say that we can't measure that precisely is either a lie, or you just have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

There's an old saying: When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging. All you're doing is demonstrating, more and more, that you are not adequately educated in the relevant scientific fields.


You're entitled to your opinion. You're also entitled to state your opinion here. But if your opinion is contrary to known science—and it is directly contrary—then you're going to be called on it. If you think that demonstrates a lack of respect for your "perspective," well, maybe so. It's hard to respect something so ill-informed.

I forgot you all are the experts on audio science: penngray, ChrisWiggles, mcnarus, geekhd. What degrees or credentials do you have again? A lot of posts on AVS. Anything else?

A sign of desperation. Not responding to the specific arguments presented, instead veering off into questions of motives, authority, etc. You're better than that.

I don't think I've ever claimed to be an expert, and I'm certainly not. I'm entirely self-taught. Which is to say that it's really pretty basic stuff. I've never taken a course in astronomy, either, but I know the earth revolves around the sun. (Even though my senses tell me it's the sun that moves!)

The important thing is to be humble about what you know, or think you know—including, especially, what you think your senses are telling you. Also, you need to know how to seek out true expertise. People who write college textbooks about human hearing are a lot more reliable than people whose only qualification is that they've spent a lot of money on audio gear, for example.

There is no point is responding to the specific arguments presented. The debate has devolved into one similar to religion. There is no "proof" for either perspective, only compelling arguments. The anti-cable side says no conclusive measurements exist to support that cables make a difference. The pro-cable side says that they know what they hear and that therefore the measurements must be be precise enough. It's a question of which evidence is more compelling to any individual. I am a scientist myself, and have learned that data measurements and conclusions drawn from them are flawed almost as often as they are valid. So, the "scientific arguments" don't compel me as much as they once did.

As fun as this debate is, I see it as futile to continue and will not respond to any more points. I've stated my perspective and some will find it useful and others will not. That is cool with me. Peace out .

If you feel, it is just a matter of opinion and not fact, then why not go after the award? It is a lot of money, you know. It has been there for years now. I wonder why noone has taken it yet. Quite strange, wouldn't you say?

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/calling-*...ter-305549.php

Actually, there is.


What are your credentials?

Scientology doesn't count.

If you are unable to agree that some types of evidence are more compelling than others, well, I don't know what to say.


You seem to be taking the approach of "everything is flawed, so let's just throw up our hands and conclude everything is shades of grey, one viewpoint is equal to another, etc."

While science can certainly be viewed as a never-ending process of two steps forward, one step back, then one & a half steps back, one step forward, etc., ultimately, the forward steps increase, build upon one another and real progress and knowledge is gained.

I find it difficult to believe that you are a scientist with the statements you've made here.

And on the Internet, no one knows you're a dog:

If that's your view, then you are no scientist.

Im right until you post any data to prove otherwise. I have the measurements, I have done all the PROPER tests. You have not done squat except babble online incoherently.

I do not give a crap what your mother did or if you can sing a tune. Whoopie do! get a real job and learn some science because building an accurate system has nothing to do with who sings and who does not. The best systems are built based on sceince and not based on what inaccurate ears hear.

I can gurantee your setup is NOT HI FI at all, its not accurate enough. Your own admission to liking tube amps proves my point. Tube amps have distortion and make a setup less accurate. Conclusion you are not HI FI. Look up the definition of high fidelity someday


btw, stop posting like a 13 year old too. It seems like you are trying to Rap or something

The pro cable side will never measure and never do a proper test. That says a lot about their position. Don't you think that is a very weak position?

The science side will listen all the pro cable side wants us too but then we take it one step further. We measure and we DO PROPER listening tests.

I keep posting this but if you have NEVER done measurements and you have NEVER done the PROPER listening test then you have ZERO creditials in this debate.

Show me someone, just anyone that has the measurement and has the data from proper listening tests and still concludes cables make a difference. Just one with valid data!! I learn something daily and I have no problem at all saying I have been corrected but you have to actually correct me first.

btw, what did you remotely post that would help anyone? No data, no cables, just simplistic arguements (well one arguement, subjective "I can hear...." ). Don't try to argue with something that simplistic next time

My question remains. Why not go after the reward then?

First there is NO one in the AV industry professionally or as a hobbyist that is "anti cable". Cables are required to get the electrons moving through the whole system. That is about the stupidest term (next to the adjectives used to describe sound quality as it passes through a given cable) that anyone has ever come up with in this industry.

Second, as I and others have mentioned numerous times and is totally provable and repeatable ad nauseum, cable specifications and performance CAN be and is accurately measured during design and manufacture by all legitimate manufacturers and this data is available freely to all.

The hyperbole laden claims made by the uber buck cables always say "their testing proves them superior" to stock cables. Do they own secret test gear that NO ONE ELSE has access to? Nope. Have they discovered a new law of physics that governs ONLY their cables? Nope. That leaves only suggestively influenced subjective "testing".

Lastly, for every one of the mega buck crowd, did you know that what you hear from your system when you first get out of bed in the morning will be dramatically different from what you hear at night? Your bodily changes that occur during the day alter your auditory and visual perceptions during the day on a gradient scale. Again, this is easily tested and PROVEN.

The test equipment is not prone to any such issue. Your body cannot make the same claim.

They why haven't you taken me up on my offer of $10,000??? I, at least, am willing to do more than you, which at this point is to blather about BS. Let's you and I take the BS out of it. Let's hook up them cables that you KNOW make a difference. Let's put it to the test or are you afraid to take a test? Hey, it's got to be the easiest $10K you ever made, right?

People preaching about BS but unwilling to stand up for their beliefs illustrates the actions of a coward.

Provide some facts to back yourself up...otherwise we'll just continue considering you the troll that you are

have a nice day.

$10K is insignificant compared to $1M. There is already an award of $1M if he can really hear those subtle differences between cables.

Lhasa: I bet you enjoy taking candy from children, too.

My bad on the Tube amp. I was wrong about you owning it. Im not angry either this is just me, Im to the point, I do not walk on eggshells. Im posting laughing at this silly debate with the uneducated

I build a new set of speakers each year, I have over 30 different drivers in my garage to choose from. I not only listen to drivers alone but I can build whatever speaker I want and make it sound how I want with active crossover designs. As for amps I buy about 5 a year and I pick what I like based on measurements and performance. The rest gets sold, given to friends and family or sits in the garage. Going out and listening is a very poor way of choosing the right products. Everything has to be done in the custom room I have built. Oh, do you have one of those? or do you have zero treatments too to go with that so called hi-fi system of yours?

As for the respect? Have you read your posts? You think we do not listen but we keep posting that we listen AND we test. We do more with this audio hobby then you do. I would suggest you get off the audio science forum and just go listen, its obvious science goes over your head.

If cables do make a difference then you should have no problem in doing a DBT or getting measurements done. Im sure you will duck that point just one more time.


btw, Still curious to why you post like you do.

don't forget temperature humidity and pressure changes.

I've avoided responding to most of your posts as you seem to be in the throws of full-flail frustration mode, irritated & overwhelmed by the deluge of resistance you've encountered and lashing out accordingly.

Two pts. though:

- White papers don't amount much more than marketing dressed up in a pseudo technical manner, especially when there is more rigorously earned counter evidence out there. This goes back to the whole "quality of evidence" argument.

- As far as believing or not believing your own ears, it's true.. in some instances, the ears are not up to the task of providing reliable enough information about the sensory world. In the world of audio playback, which is in many ways a very mature technology market, the ears are often the wildest variable by far and therefore, they need to be properly controlled for if you want to gain any semblance of truly accurate information from them.

Some, I guess, just aren't ready to accept this idea. Perhaps this is because it interferes with some sort of romanticized ideal of what it is to be an audiophile enthusiast, which for many, a large part of the hobby is the casual experimentation with various components, the feelings of heightened insight and satisfaction when you perceive positive changes and the sharing of those experiences with other similarly-minded enthusiasts.

To suggest to someone like this that there are some categories of audio where auditioning is simply no longer needed, or at least, the objective differences are so very slight that careful listening guidelines are a must to gain any realization of true difference, well, that is certainly a buzz kill. I get that.

All I can say to them is.. perhaps it's time to find a new buzz. Or, how 'bout simply concentrating on enjoying the music more? If you need the constant cable and component experimentation and more and cooler looking "stuff" to get full enjoyment from music, well then, I have to question how much of a music fan you are in the first place. The biggest music fans I know spend relatively little time thinking about equipment but they do have a keen interest for exploring new music and a voracious appetite for music in general.