The Great Cable and Interconnect Swindle: An Etiology

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

5 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

 

No. Didn't assert that. I stated that anyone who claims that cables produce audible yet unmeasurable differences must produce strong evidence. 

 

 

ok but we are back then to burden of proof and NO, people do not have to produce strong evidence or proof for their observations that they report and share with peers. That said, the cable manufacturers have a greater 'obligation' but this stuff is very difficult so I am ok with "listen and make up your own mind" = caveat emptor.

 

 

5 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

Not to claim that their hypotheses are as valid as the established science that such claims contradict.

 

You are begging the question. You don't know if such claims contradict established science without YOU conducting experiment = burden of proof is on you in that case. You can demand they do it but you cannot definitively state they are contradicting science.Why? read my previous post.

 

5 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

 

 Science is based on theories and proof (experimental evidence).

"proof (experimental evidence)" is totally incorrect.

 

5 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

 there's no experimental evidence you or anyone else has provided to support any of the claims of audiophile cable providers yet, in the 46 pages of discussion. So, where's your evidence, Mr. Neuroscience?

 

Yet again you keep on coming back to burden of proof. I've already answered this on multiple occasions. I get you don't want to get it, so best to leave off my responses to you until you introduce something new. Cheers

[fas42]

9 minutes ago, jabbr said:

What stops me it’s that it’s incomprehensible ... and as I’ve said you haven’t formed a coherent testable hypothesis. That’s fine but this is your hobby, not mine. I’ve god other things to fiddle with.

 

A key aspect is that when I put on recording, and it doesn't tick all the boxes, then that says, to me, that there is something wrong with the playback chain, and not with the recording ... putting aside any reservations, does that make any sense to you, as a method?

 

9 minutes ago, jabbr said:

Again you would need to firm a coherent method that might garner enthusiasm ... there are so many options. I guess a likelihood of good results before making the effort to do something. I would need more from you to cross the threshold of interest.

 

The starting point is to be able to listen to a recording that ain't workin', on your system, note where it isn't making the grade - and then be prepared to do various experiments, assessing what changes you hear as you try something - this allows one to build an understanding of where the issues might be ... unless one is prepared to think in this fashion, then you'll be working blind; and highly likely will only end up going in circles.

[fas42]

6 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

The starting point is to be able to listen to a recording that ain't workin', on your system, note where it isn't making the grade - and then be prepared to do various experiments, assessing what changes you hear as you try something - this allows one to build an understanding of where the issues might be ... unless one is prepared to think in this fashion, then you'll be working blind; and highly likely will only end up going in circles.

 

An absolutely perfect example of this just happened seconds ago ... Bev, my partner, reacted to my adding some extra mains filtering to the rig, and again playing a Dave Edmunds album, in being hesitant on thinking that it was the same CD she had heard yesterday ... the sense of the sound had changed so significantly, that she was in doubt ... without me saying, beforehand, that this might happen. So, only the level of filtering had changed ... nothing else ...

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

I have a theory. Frank and Paul are somehow related....round in circles we go I cannot say it is a very scientific theory

[pkane2001]

47 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

ok but we are back then to burden of proof and NO, people do not have to produce strong evidence or proof for their observations that they report and share with peers. That said, the cable manufacturers have a greater 'obligation' but this stuff is very difficult so I am ok with "listen and make up your own mind" = caveat emptor.

 

You are begging the question. You don't know if such claims contradict established science without YOU conducting experiment = burden of proof is on you in that case. You can demand they do it but you cannot definitively state they are contradicting science.Why? read my previous post.

 

"proof (experimental evidence)" is totally incorrect.

 

Yet again you keep on coming back to burden of proof. I've already answered this on multiple occasions. I get you don't want to get it, so best to leave off my responses to you until you introduce something new. Cheers

 

You don't get off that easy  I didn't say that people can't share observations. But, this is Objectify forum -- the ask is to provide objective evidence to substantiate any audio claims. If we are going to let anyone post their subjective observations here then why have this forum? Isn't that what the rest of AS is for?

 

Burden of proof is on the magic audio cable purveyors. If you continue to argue that it's OK to accept their claims without experimental evidence, then you're simply espousing your own beliefs and not discussing science.

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

10 hours ago, jabbr said:

This really is a different topic for a different thread.

 

I just spoke with John. How difficult would it be to build a GUI for the decoder? Are we talking days, weeks, months of time? As you say this should be discussed on its own thread but just wanted to get some idea.

[Teresa]

On 5/14/2020 at 11:07 AM, PYP said:

Let's give AudioQuest some credit for not only saving suicidal electrons, but for making some very fine recordings.  I don't know if being able to make fine recordings = they know how to make great cables, but one assumes they do not use mono price cables in their recording chain.  Would be a great journalistic find if they do...

 

FYI the AudioQuest Music SACDs I have all use AudioQuest cables. Some of my favorite blues recordings in my collection.

[jabbr]

7 hours ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

I just spoke with John. How difficult would it be to build a GUI for the decoder? Are we talking days, weeks, months of time? As you say this should be discussed on its own thread but just wanted to get some idea.

I have been doing some decoding using my Linux workstation, and I have scripts to help automate the process. I guess at some point someone could write a GUI that would execute a command line program — I think the amount of time could be weeks for someone experienced in doing that type of coding ie I assume you want to use Windows. 

[jabbr]

10 hours ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

Frank some might consider your method as "fix the errors". It may be a truism or a priori truth but adds nothing new or interesting

That. 
 

We need the Best Buy Geek Squad, or a great auto mechanic ... and god knows how many hours I’ve spent tracking down bugs or maddening configuration issues, and how genuinely thankful I’ve been to people who help me. 
 

@fas42 should have an audio shop and installation service. That would be wonderful for the people in your community — these are all great things it’s just not relevant to the topic here — not everything needs to be a testable hypothesis. When I am trying to get a network configured, there are a set of steps that I go through and ultimately spend a fair amount of time randomly changing settings until things work — that’s not a testable hypothesis nor does it need to be — not every activity we do needs to be science. But that’s really all off topic here because I was using @John Dyson’s software and ability for members here to form sensory experiences as a result of that as an example of something that could be developed into an actual distributed experiment. I’m using that distinct from cables because it’s less overloaded (there is less religion associated with “feralA” 😂)
 

[sandyk]

17 hours ago, pkane2001 said:

Burden of proof is on the magic audio cable purveyors

 No it isn't, any more than it is of any other manufacturer, whether Automobile or even food, to show Objective proof of their claims of their product's superiority over a competitor.

 It is something demanded by Objective people like yourself , and only relevant in areas such as Medical and Safety where false claims may be dangerous.

[kumakuma]

15 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 No it isn't, any more than it is of any other manufacturer, whether Automobile or even food, to show Objective proof of their claims of their product's superiority over a competitor.

 It is something demanded by Objective people like yourself , and only relevant in areas such as Medical and Safety where false claims may be dangerous.

 

https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/advertising-promotions/false-or-misleading-claims

[sandyk]

1 hour ago, kumakuma said:

 

https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/advertising-promotions/false-or-misleading-claims

 

 Grow up ! We all know that a vast proportion of Advertising is complete and utter BS , and of course deliberate outright lies, particularly in areas such as Medical and food where safety is involved should be exposed  . You will rarely see anything done in areas such as Audio for the simple reason that most claims are unable to be disputed purely by measurements, the same with most Electronic and electrical products , or even claims about different brands of Petroleum because of the cost of disproving them. 

Australia, like many other countries has become way too litigious, and no prizes for guessing where most of this originated originally. 

The old Caveat Emptor should apply just as much these days. We need to take more responsibility for our own actions and not rely as much on Government Authorities  and regulation.

[sandyk]

17 hours ago, Teresa said:

 

FYI the AudioQuest Music SACDs I have all use AudioQuest cables. Some of my favorite blues recordings in my collection.

 

 Any claim that AudioQuest cables resulted in these SACDs superior sounding qualities to your ears should be taken with a grain of salt and are unlikely to be proved by Objective measurements.

[Teresa]

7 minutes ago, sandyk said:

Any claim that AudioQuest cables resulted in these SACDs superior sounding qualities to your ears should be taken with a grain of salt and are unlikely to be proved by Objective measurements.

 

They or I made no such claim. The AudioQuest cables are listed in the credits along with all the other equipment used. It would be silly IMHO for AudioQuest Music to use a different brand of cable. Musically and sonically some great blues IMHO.

[sandyk]

11 minutes ago, Teresa said:

 

They or I made no such claim. The AudioQuest cables are listed in the credits along with all the other equipment used. It would be silly IMHO for AudioQuest Music to use a different brand of cable. Musically and sonically some great blues IMHO.

 

 By including their cables in the list of credits, they are implying that the use of their own cables helped to achieve the great sounding results.Otherwise, why bother to mention this ?

[fas42]

People are still clinging to the belief that flawed systems can be "fixed" by adding things like the right, magic, cable ... the car mechanic rolls his eyes when a customer comes in, insisting the special spark plugs that he's read about will fix his misfiring engine ... "Mate, that engine has some issue deep in its workings - fooling 'round with cosmetic things, like the brand of plugs used, will probably change the pattern of misfiring a bit ... but the engine is still broken. Until you find out the underlying problem, you're essentially wasting your money ... "

 

That was something I realised 30 years ago ... and absolutely nothing's changed, in people's attitudes, in the interim period.

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

15 hours ago, jabbr said:

I have been doing some decoding using my Linux workstation, and I have scripts to help automate the process. I guess at some point someone could write a GUI that would execute a command line program — I think the amount of time could be weeks for someone experienced in doing that type of coding ie I assume you want to use Windows. 

Yes, Windows

 

I have basic command line skills for specific tasks in Windows but a GUI for the decoder just seems less daunting.

[PYP]

On 5/13/2020 at 3:55 PM, pkane2001 said:

Batteries are needed to help polarize the dielectric. According to some well-unknown and as-of-yet unpublished research, dielectric is the main cause of cable-induced distortions in an audio system. The solution is to bias it (ie., electrically charge) so as to not let the electrons leap from the conductor to their untimely death into the dielectric, which some are apparently inclined to do. 

 

I thought you were kidding about the electrons:  http://nautil.us//blog/electrons-may-very-well-be-conscious?mc_cid=646f0c04bd&mc_eid=cd0b70ea89     David Bohm, another well-known American physicist, argued similarly: “The ability of form to be active is the most characteristic feature of mind, and we have something that is mind-like already with the electron.”

 

 

[jabbr]

10 hours ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

Yes, Windows

 

I have basic command line skills for specific tasks in Windows but a GUI for the decoder just seems less daunting.

 

Think of learning the command line as an educational experience

 

I am using Linux, and the capabilities to write scripts to automate tasks is remarkable. 

I think Windows 10 has a Linux subsystem that would allow use of those

ok ... offtopic for this thread but since we are discussing the Linux commandline/bash I think that's fair game for this subforum.

 

Back to cables, and my slight diversion here: you see how the difficulty of using a particular ***free*** software program that really does alter the sound is preventing you, and countless other anonymous people, from using this yet people are willing to spend countless hours plugging in and listening to cables that at most cause a relatively insignificant benefit (comparatively -- the software really does cause a significant effect): I think that the reason everyone focuses so strongly on cables is that they are so easy to replace, it is an easy and accessable way to do an "upgrade" 🤷‍♂️

 

[Allan F]

15 hours ago, sandyk said:

 By including their cables in the list of credits, they are implying that the use of their own cables helped to achieve the great sounding results.Otherwise, why bother to mention this ?

 

AudioQuest is stating, as a fact, that their cables were part of the recording equipment chain that produced those results. In this context, there is no more obligation on their part to provide objective measurements of their cables than there is on Sony to provide objective measurements of the Sony DSD workstations that are used to produce SACD's. "The proof is in the pudding."

[jabbr]

On 5/13/2020 at 4:13 PM, gmgraves said:

Another way of saying that “extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof”. Words to live the Audiophile lifestyle by...

 

What would need "extraordinary proof" (nonexistant and never provided) would be the claims about "why XXX cable is better"

It is easy to dismiss the claims as BS without doing your own "experiment"  (the science is that well established).

 

That doesn't mean that two cables don't sound different. They very well may. The question is why would anyone want to pay $$$$$ for a cable who's manufacturer has no idea why its "better" (or worse). I choose cables which are well constructed e.g. there are a variety of well respected XLR cables with  Neutrik connectors that pros use -- or Amphenol. and if you want to get fancy custom cables then Lemo makes some really sweet connectors but you need equipment designed for that.

 

apropos the above video: absolutely, a BNC connector with RG cables can go out into Ghz. Go milspec if your want 'fancy' but its all dirt cheap.

 

So we've talked about why cables might sound different, certainly not the ability to carry the audio signal -- that is where @pkane2001 can refer to well established known science, but we can argue single ended vs balanced, and shielded SG vs twisted pair, and we can dismiss some of these ridiculous pseudoscientific explanations out of hand ... the known physics of electronics is just that well known. Yet, as I've said many many times, it is the out-of-band transmission of noise between the components that is not accounted for: as I keep saying: common mode noise transmission between components can be affected by different cables in ways that are not commonly described in the audiophile literature: take a look at that book that the guy in the video above is holding up, y'know that "Ott" guy  

 

[pkane2001]

3 hours ago, PYP said:

 

I thought you were kidding about the electrons:  http://nautil.us//blog/electrons-may-very-well-be-conscious?mc_cid=646f0c04bd&mc_eid=cd0b70ea89     David Bohm, another well-known American physicist, argued similarly: “The ability of form to be active is the most characteristic feature of mind, and we have something that is mind-like already with the electron.”

 

Is there a psychiatrist in the house? Should we discuss the trauma and the psychosis that might be driving these poor electrons to jump? I bet the problem is with their poor working conditions in the non-pure copper or silver conductors. Or perhaps the difficulty of navigating the conductors without myrtle wood lifters. Life sure is stressful for electrons...

[PYP]

33 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

 

Is there a psychiatrist in the house? Should we discuss the trauma and the psychosis that might be driving these poor electrons to jump? I bet the problem is with their poor working conditions in the non-pure copper or silver conductors. Or perhaps the difficulty of navigating the conductors without myrtle wood lifters. Life sure is stressful for electrons...

 

And how about when audiophiles use the cable in the wrong direction (against the arrow indicated on the cable)?  Can you imagine what that does to a little electron?  I hope that your interest in this subject leads to a white paper.  

[Allan F]

33 minutes ago, PYP said:

 

And how about when audiophiles use the cable in the wrong direction (against the arrow indicated on the cable)?  Can you imagine what that does to a little electron?  I hope that your interest in this subject leads to a white paper.  

 

I would expect that to lead to head on collisions between electrons, which could lead to splitting headaches..

[jabbr]

33 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

 

Is there a psychiatrist in the house? Should we discuss the trauma and the psychosis that might be driving these poor electrons to jump? I bet the problem is with their poor working conditions in the non-pure copper or silver conductors. Or perhaps the difficulty of navigating the conductors without myrtle wood lifters. Life sure is stressful for electrons...

Ha ha, but consider balanced pure class A amp with bias ... or LVDS :