Those who own Audioquest cable...what do you think?

[Allan F]

My point is that if you are relying on the opinions of EEs (even those from Benchmark), keep in mind that all of that textbook training in electrical theory has narrowed, considerably, their capacity for out-of-the-box thinking especially when that thinking flies in the face of all the digital quantization theory and conductor behavioral theory that they were taught in engineering school.

+1

And rather than "even those from Benchmark", some might suggest "especially those from Benchmark", if one considers John Siau's views about DSD.

[Allan F]

It's the emperor's new clothes.

It may be to you because you can't hear a difference. Please accept my sincere sympathies for what is lacking in either your hearing or your equipment.

[Allan F]

Nice variation of the stereotypical audiophile insult.

An appropriate response, IMO, to a cynical skeptic and his rhetoric of ridicule.

[Allan F]

I think this is a trap that is best avoided by me, especially since even the best and most expensive cables seem to provide provide only small, seemingly ephemeral "improvements" at best.

If that is what you have concluded, George, based on your own experience, that is the route you should follow. OTOH, my own experience and that of others is that better cables can provide an appreciable improvement in SQ that is anything but ephemeral. More expensive may or may not result in "better" but, IMO, the cheapest rarely if ever are comparable.

[Allan F]

As this thread concerns HDMI cables could you explain in technical terms what constitutes a "better" HDMI cable. And since it's experience that affords you such conviction, what has been your journey of progress with changing HDMI cables?

Perhaps it has gone OT, but this thread includes many posts about audio cables in general. My reply was in response to one. If you are interested in only those posts related to HDMI, you may want to click "Search Thread" at the top of the page and enter "HDMI".

[Allan F]

I can, and I do.

"A closed mind is a dying mind."

-Edna Ferber

[Allan F]

If two cables behave identically in every measurement known to mankind, then will sound identically except for expectation bias and measurement error. That is for certain.

You 'beg the question' by assuming that 'every measurement known to mankind' is exhaustive and that nothing new can possibly be identified and measured in the future. By that token, the only thing that is 'certain' is your opinion.

[Allan F]

What question is being begged?

FYI, "begging the question" is a philosophy concept, i.e. a logical fallacy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question

 

The logical fallacy in your argument is the a priori assumption that every possible measurable characteristic is currently known, to the exclusion of any potential discoveries in the future. As I see it, your position can otherwise be stated as: Unless a difference heard between cables can be demonstrably measured, the difference heard cannot be real.

 

 

[Allan F]

Don't take this personal. I'm not asking you to trust my ears. Trust your own ears. Jeez!

Don't you understand? What we have hear might be called the "reverse placebo effect" that these objectivists continually suffer from. Even if they hear actual differences, they reject them as being real unless they can be confirmed by measurements or double blind tests. It is an article of faith that their ears cannot be trusted.

[Allan F]

From the website:

 

A member of several audio forums is a wire and cryogenic expert at a major research laboratory.

He reports that:

a] The differences in electrical properties is trivial.

b] It can damage insulation and plastics.

c] The differences will disappear with just a small amount of handling.

I understand that the cryogenic treatment is done to bare wire, before any insulation or jacket is installed. If such is the case, people can draw their own conclusions about the individual's 'expertise'.

[Allan F]

The only problem is that those measurements don't actually mean anything. LRC on audio cables in the lengths commonly use in stereo systems is trivial and if one does the maths, the amount of measurable attenuation is in the 10th of a dB (or less) range and that attenuation is at the top of the passband (20 KHz and above) where I guarantee than nobody, including the virgin ears of a 12-year-old-girl, could possibly notice it!

If we assume that some interconnect or USB cables do, in fact, sound different, then there would appear to be two possibilities. Either the very small measurable differences do have an effect on the brain's auditory function or, if they don't, then some other characteristic - currently unknown or misunderstood - must account for these differences.

[Allan F]

I sincerely hope you are correct. I believe, however, in this instance the evidence suggests otherwise.

Actually, there is a complete lack of evidence to support your contention, so it is incapable of suggesting anything of the kind. Your biased opinion is anything but evidence.

[Allan F]

Uh huh. I'm guessing you are/were a lawyer also, Allan?

 

...Feeling slighted, Allan?

Not in the slightest, because my background gives me considerably more than a little knowledge of the difference between unsupported opinion and evidence.

[Allan F]

It's because I find listening evaluations a strenuous, tedious activity that some measurements would be helpful in the case of cables; I think they'd help me to choose one topology over another.

While critical listening to evaluate SQ of any audio gear may well be a strenuous, tedious activity, measurements don't tell the whole story and will never be a substitute. The best equipment designers use measurements, of course, but virtually all of them make final design decisions, e.g. choice of components, etc., based on actual listening.

[Allan F]

... Interesting story but merely anecdotal, of course.

An 'interesting' story that is most likely made up and offered by one similar to certain proselytizing members of this forum with a particularly rigid point of view.

[Allan F]

I'm not overly confident of my assessments with cables but when comparing shielded vs. unshielded I preferred the latter.

While you may have preferred the particular unshielded cables you had in your system, extending that generally to shielded vs unshielded cables is not justified. In more cases than not, the opposite would likely be true.

[Allan F]

Hi Allan. Just curious about what leads you to say that. (I can think of reasons, but wondered what yours was.)

I'm just working from first principles, Jud. All else being equal, it would seem logical that cables shielded from the effects of emi/rfi should sound better - or at least, no worse - than similar cables that are not so shielded. OTOH, I would expect that would not necessarily follow for cables of dissimilar characteristics.

[Allan F]

Cardas also has a Room/Speaker Setup Guide and it includes variations for different room shapes: Cardas Room Setup Guide

[Allan F]

When did any magazine ever say something didn't work?

That isn't the kind of did not work he is referring to here. He is referring to some tweak offered up for magazine review. And the review saying, well this tweak didn't do anything we could hear.

Or, more simply, it was a rhetorical question!

[Allan F]

I went out and bought a hat just so I could take it off. By the way, do you think the lid could have an adverse effect on sound quality?

It probably depends on how much headroom your equipment has.

[Allan F]

I think that most 60's and 70's rock will die with us baby boomers, and the 2000s pop music will mostly die with that generation as well.

The resurgence in popularity of The Beatles, as well as more than a bit of the "classic" rock of the 60's and 70's among young people, would appear to belie that.

[Allan F]

Hearing a Bruce Springsteen song, which George also may not be familiar with, I discussed with a friend how many snippets of references in that song no longer made sense to the current generation

 

...Allan puts up the Beatles, and while some of their music is linked closely to their time, another significant portion of it is abstracted in a way to evoke feelings without reference to when.

Sure, if the content of songs is topical or generational, they are generally not going to last. But IMO, there is a lot more music from the period that fits into the latter category than you give credit for.

[Allan F]

And of course, you can see that from your lofty vantage point in the 22nd century?

No less than the lofty vantage point used for your negative prognostication, George.

[Allan F]

No- we are all born with the ability to play a piano, drive a car, and hunt down, kill, dress, and cook our food too. We can not express those abilities without training and practice though.

We may be born with the ability to learn how to do those things, but we are not born with the ability to do them. More importantly, when it comes to creating music or art at a high level, some people are born with the talent to do so and others are not.

[Allan F]

If you were born with normal human form and normal human mental capacity, you were born with the ability to do them. Yes, just as with speech or table manners, you have to learn these tasks, however this is not a magical ability you aquire at a certain age.

 

Talent is something else entirely, and perhaps defines how well and how easily you will be able to learn a particular task.

 

I am sure people are born with talent too, but most talent is the result of nuture, dedication, and ernormous [sic] amounts of hard work and practice.

Not when it comes to the creative arts. Hard work and commitment may be necessary to nurture the talent to produce great art. But hard work will not produce great art without the essential innate talent. For example, most people can probably learn how to play a musical instrument. But, only those with talent can learn how to play it really well.