The Great Cable and Interconnect Swindle: An Etiology

[wgscott]

I think it is a mistake not to engage in debate.

 

It also takes a lot of the recreational pleasure away.

[wgscott]

One complicating problem is that sub-standard cables do exist, so you have to draw a line somewhere. That, too, becomes problematic.

[wgscott]

Where did he claim to be impartial?

 

Or is this something you only require of other people's opinions that are at variance with your own?

[wgscott]

a spirited argument

 

Does this mean one involving heavy drinking, or imaginary deities?

[wgscott]

Why would anyone in their right mind trust their ears (and implicitly, aural memory) over objective measurements?

 

I think it's important that if a member here makes the statement "I tried cable X, or file type Y and heard a difference" that he/she should describe the experiment that eliminates expectation bias that was used in coming to that conclusion.

[wgscott]

Touche

 

But I think that many of us have heard differences that were so obvious that "expectation bias" was not a factor. Is there a point at which expectation bias can/should be ignored? Should it be employed in every single daily activity no matter the significance?

 

Paul beat me to it...

 

 

Well, as you clearly recognized, I was just poking a little fun at your statement.

 

But your question is fair enough.

 

For example, when picking out speakers, I only did a (single) blind test at the very end, when trying to choose between two different price-points in a very similar line by one manufacturer. Otherwise, the differences I was hearing were fairly obvious to me. Why did I think this might be anything other than self-deception?

 

The speakers I was comparing were constructed very differently, and different measurements and physical characteristics. It is not unreasonable to think that bigger speakers might sound better than smaller ones, etc. There are easily quantifiable, measurable differences.

 

With power cords (for example), it is much more counter-intuitive to suspect that there are going to be audible differences, because no one can come up with a clear, testable explanation based on physics and engineering that predicts this behavior, and no one can point to unambiguous measurements. So the "null hypothesis" is that they should be the same, and the burden of proof is shifted to whomever claims a difference.

[wgscott]

I am sure this is the sort of stuff a lot of readers out there want to hear and know about, i.e discussions on how much they need to spend to get great sound. What they often get instead is ad nauseum discussion on how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

 

Periodically punctuated with the assertion that you can't hear differences obvious to everyone else because you didn't spend enough money on your speakers, country-club membership dues, etc.