Poll: Where are you along the cable divide?

[4est]

For example, I think the Meridian folks showed people did hear some particular differences in filtering in the A/D and/or D/A process.

 

 

 

IIRC, Chris published an article a while ago about a paper collecting a bunch of these test results.

 

Well, if one cannot discern some differences in those regards (meaning big changes), one is likely in the wrong hobby. ABX and/or DBT seem to work for large differences.

[SoundAndMotion]

Jud,

 

Thanks for your thorough response. But I think you are mixing the issues of confirmation bias and the laws of physics that can explain cable differences.

 

On the other hand, the idea that removing confirmation bias by blinding will get you anywhere is doubtful as well.

I don't get this comment. "Removing" confirmation bias necessarily removes one confounding factor in interpreting results. That does not mean the rest of the test design is valid, as you point out. But if you list all the possible problems with a design, shouldn't removing one of them be a good thing? (If your method of blinding doesn't cause its own confound, the answer is yes)

Also, note I said eliminate or minimize.

 

So let's look for something that could have engineering/scientific validity.

But what does this have to do with confirmation bias? You can't just jumble all issues of science and engineering into one big pot. The reference you cite could explain why there may be differences, but it doesn't address whether they produce audible effects.

- After (and certainly if) you've got a working hypothesis based on your repeated measurements of differences between cables in particular values that may cause audible differences, then you conduct good, scientific controlled listening tests to see whether these differences translate to audibility. These are unlikely to be the sort of thing folks can easily do at home in a valid way. (Scientists know more than you [including me].)

You'll have to explain how this works. I am a scientist, published in multisensory perception. How do scientists know more than a scientist?

[Jud]

Well, if one cannot discern some differences in those regards (meaning big changes), one is likely in the wrong hobby. ABX and/or DBT seem to work for large differences.

 

You can find research with surprisingly large differences in non-esoteric audio qualities ABX does *not* work with.

[Jud]

Jud,

 

Thanks for your thorough response. But I think you are mixing the issues of confirmation bias and the laws of physics that can explain cable differences.

 

 

 

My apologies if I didn't structure my response very clearly.

 

I don't get this comment. "Removing" confirmation bias necessarily removes one confounding factor in interpreting results. That does not mean the rest of the test design is valid, as you point out. But if you list all the possible problems with a design, shouldn't removing one of them be a good thing? (If your method of blinding doesn't cause its own confound, the answer is yes)

Also, note I said eliminate or minimize.

 

 

Yes, I agree. To get to scientifically valid experimental design, we must look carefully for all the confounding factors known to us and eliminate them insofar as possible. I was simply pointing out, as you mention, that blinded testing does not remove all possible confounding factors, and may even introduce some of its own.

 

But what does this have to do with confirmation bias? You can't just jumble all issues of science and engineering into one big pot. The reference you cite could explain why there may be differences, but it doesn't address whether they produce audible effects.

 

 

 

Yes, exactly. Once you have a plausible hypothesis based on measurements of real differences, you then have to do scientifically valid testing to determine whether the differences are audible.

 

You'll have to explain how this works. I am a scientist, published in multisensory perception. How do scientists know more than a scientist?

 

 

 

Hah! I was speaking in general.

[SoundAndMotion]

Once you have a plausible hypothesis based on measurements of real differences, you then have to do scientifically valid testing to determine whether the differences are audible.

When one is trying to understand the whole story of a particular phenomenon (e.g. audible differences between 2 cables), I do not agree that there is only one appropriate sequence to follow. You are saying that one must first measure real differences before testing audibility. Yet many who state they hear a difference claim that a lack of differences in measurements is meaningless, since you may not be measuring the correct thing.

 

When trying to understand an effect, where several tests/measurements must be performed for a complete picture, I go for the low-hanging fruit first. A simpler test done first can guide you in subsequent steps.

 

If a group reports anecdotally that they hear a difference between cable A and cable B, I’d first confirm an audible difference before doing a series of physical tests (passive electrical properties, metallurgy, audio signal tests, etc.).

I do agree with your point that it is easy to screw up a design and a negative result from a careless test has no meaning: it doesn’t confirm or deny anything.

[mansr]

You can find research with surprisingly large differences in non-esoteric audio qualities ABX does *not* work with.

 

That may well be, but consider the following. Many audiophiles report hearing "night and day" differences between cables, even when listening takes place weeks apart. If these claims are true, surely they should be able to make the same distinction with a shorter interval between tests. The arguments about the limits of echoic memory you're so fond of trotting out don't apply when testing the veracity of reports that clearly do not rely on this aspect.

[Jud]

That may well be, but consider the following. Many audiophiles report hearing "night and day" differences between cables, even when listening takes place weeks apart. If these claims are true, surely they should be able to make the same distinction with a shorter interval between tests. The arguments about the limits of echoic memory you're so fond of trotting out don't apply when testing the veracity of reports that clearly do not rely on this aspect.

 

You're correct the reports could not be relying on echoic memory, valid or not. But quite a lot of the performed and proposed blind tests do.

 

 

Have a look at blinded tests in the literature for which results are better than chance and see if you can detect a pattern.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

[mansr]

You're correct the reports could not be relying on echoic memory, valid or not. But quite a lot of the performed and proposed blind tests do.

 

Have a look at blinded tests in the literature for which results are better than chance and see if you can detect a pattern.

 

Would you agree that a difference perceptible without relying on echoic memory ought to be also perceptible under echoic memory constraints?

[nickwill]

Possibly the sound clip in the link here makes double blind or ABX testing done properly a lot more complicated. The implication is that if B is better than A, when we hear A again it will more than likely sound as good as B, our brains doing the work for us. Flipping back and to, they will sound the same

[Jud]

Would you agree that a difference perceptible without relying on echoic memory ought to be also perceptible under echoic memory constraints?

 

No.

 

 

 

Attempting not to be completely cryptic: If you are in a situation where you are relying on something other than echoic memory, this absolutely does not mean you would be able to achieve the same perceptions when explicitly relying on echoic memory. Different mental abilities are being used.

[AudioDoctor]

I know you said for a different day, but without getting too far into it, I'm curious: Concussions, and/or something else?

 

No, not really I just don't see the NFL as anything useful for society when I have to pay taxes for a stadium owned by a billionaire and paid for by the state. I can find many more beneficial uses for 500 million dollars than a new, ugly, Vikings stadium. The same goes for the entire NFL. Not one single redeeming quality IMO. NFL = National Felons League. I also find sports to be a mass distraction to keep people fat happy and drunk and their minds off of real issues of importance in society.

[mansr]

No.

 

Attempting not to be completely cryptic: If you are in a situation where you are relying on something other than echoic memory, this absolutely does not mean you would be able to achieve the same perceptions when explicitly relying on echoic memory. Different mental abilities are being used.

 

So a "night and day" difference would suddenly vanish when echoic memory becomes available? I find that hard to believe.

 

Obviously differences like a pure tone lasting either 60 or 120 seconds can't be detected within the limits of echoic memory even though most people would readily make the distinction. Perhaps good cables make the music last longer.

[Sal1950]

When trying to understand an effect, where several tests/measurements must be performed for a complete picture, I go for the low-hanging fruit first. A simpler test done first can guide you in subsequent steps.

 

If a group reports anecdotally that they hear a difference between cable A and cable B, I’d first confirm an audible difference before doing a series of physical tests (passive electrical properties, metallurgy, audio signal tests, etc.).

 

Exactly, you don't waste time testing for the reasons of a difference until you've done the homework to determine if the difference actually exists..

 

Instead we live in a world of accepted ridiculous claims from both the manufacturers and "audiophiles".

 

The audiophiles making such claims of "my wife called from the kitchen (honey what did you change, the system sounds so much better)?" over some new expensive piece of wire. Yet they go into a bunch of handwaving over the very idea of putting those claims to bias controlled double blind testing. Blind testing doesn't work, "it's too fast, short, trama inducing, blah blah blah", when it still remains at the base of any serious scientific investigation.

 

The cable manufacturers are producing a dozen different cables for each use at ever increasing cost. Then they attach some pseudo-science explanation as to why each move up the pric$ing ladder will sound better in your system. Even going to the extremes of producing rigged video's to pull the wool over your eyes. All the while the "audiophiles" are nodding like bobble-heads and clapping like trained seals over being feed this line of malarkey.

 

Come on people, $1k a foot power cable, really. What's that going to do that the miles of conventional wiring behind it hasn't already done?

 

Would you accept these types of actions and claims from a pharmaceutical company?

[rodrigaj]

No, not really I just don't see the NFL as anything useful for society when I have to pay taxes for a stadium owned by a billionaire and paid for by the state. I can find many more beneficial uses for 500 million dollars than a new, ugly, Vikings stadium. The same goes for the entire NFL. Not one single redeeming quality IMO. NFL = National Felons League. I also find sports to be a mass distraction to keep people fat happy and drunk and their minds off of real issues of importance in society.

 

The same year that they finished the addition to the Green Bay Packers stadium (Lambeau Field), the Green Bay Symphony went silent after 100 years of performing music.

[AudioDoctor]

The same year that they finished the addition to the Green Bay Packers stadium (Lambeau Field), the Green Bay Symphony went silent after 100 years of performing music.

 

I'm sorry to hear that. IMO The Arts are much more important than a bunch of overpaid felons on steroids bashing into each other, while being cheered on by rednecks drinking piss (Budweiser) and then voting for dRUMPf...

 

Yeah, I am a bit biased.

 

We nearly lost the Minnesota Orchestra as well a few years ago, but cooler heads prevailed and Osmö came back.

[Jud]

So a "night and day" difference would suddenly vanish when echoic memory becomes available? I find that hard to believe.

 

 

 

Wouldn't you find it hard to believe someone could fail to compare the color/shade of two objects correctly if they were within inches of each other?

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm sure I could find an example where the brightness or color of a continguous visual object looked different depending on background.

 

 

 

Now think: What is responsible for our visual perception when the squares are on the checkerboard? And what is responsible for our perception when the squares are held together? We are using *different* mental abilities, and these control our ability to perceive so completely that even when you know for a certainty the squares are the same shade, you cannot stop yourself from perceiving them differently once they are back on the checkerboard.

[new_media]

Would you accept these types of actions and claims from a pharmaceutical company?

 

Only if they pay for me to attend a conference in Maui.

[Shanepj]

If your ears like the sound of a cables, price doesn't matter. This is true even if you cannot afford it, you can appreciate what it offers regardless

 

At the end of the day, your only trying to deliver least loss in signal degradation from the cables in your system.

 

One thing I have to note, if your system or ears cannot show you what a good cable can do, then don't worry as you'll never miss it what's on offer

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

[AudioDoctor]

If your ears like the sound of a cables, price doesn't matter. This is true even if you cannot afford it, you can appreciate what it offers regardless

 

At the end of the day, your only trying to deliver least loss in signal degradation from the cables in your system.

 

One thing I have to note, if your system or ears cannot show you what a good cable can do, then don't worry as you'll never miss it what's on offer

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

 

SO what magic system do you have that allows you to hear the cable differences?

[Jud]

 

One thing I have to note, if your system or ears cannot show you what a good cable can do, then don't worry as you'll never miss it what's on offer

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

 

 

It does amaze me the number of folks of both cable "persuasions" who insist anyone competent with a decent system must hear as they do.

[mansr]

Wouldn't you find it hard to believe someone could fail to compare the color/shade of two objects correctly if they were within inches of each other?

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm sure I could find an example where the brightness or color of a continguous visual object looked different depending on background.

 

 

 

Now think: What is responsible for our visual perception when the squares are on the checkerboard? And what is responsible for our perception when the squares are held together? We are using *different* mental abilities, and these control our ability to perceive so completely that even when you know for a certainty the squares are the same shade, you cannot stop yourself from perceiving them differently once they are back on the checkerboard.

 

Your argument is backwards. The correct analogy would be the ability to reliably distinguish two colours when viewed one at a time days or weeks apart, yet when seen side by side they would be indistinguishable. This never happens.

 

The only thing your example demonstrates is the ease with which we can be tricked into perceiving a difference where none exists.

[Jud]

Your argument is backwards. The correct analogy would be the ability to reliably distinguish two colours when viewed one at a time days or weeks apart, yet when seen side by side they would be indistinguishable. This never happens.

 

The only thing your example demonstrates is the ease with which we can be tricked into perceiving a difference where none exists.

 

 

Illusions are considered instructive by researchers because they give us clues about how our brains work to interpret the signals they receive.

 

 

 

See if you can gather anything from the discussions on this page and the links: Diana Deutsch - Illusions and Research

[Jud]

Illusions are considered instructive by researchers because they give us clues about how our brains work to interpret the signals they receive.

 

 

 

See if you can gather anything from the discussions on this page and the links: Diana Deutsch - Illusions and Research

 

 

Especially this one: Diana Deutsch - Short Term Memory for Tones

[Shanepj]

Just a query, people who do not believe that cables make a difference at any level, what is your strand count?

 

Are you using bell wire or something better and if your not using bell wire, what has made you decide on this process if cables do not make a difference

 

For me, it's my choice and I know what I like and especially what I don't like in a sound. It's taken me over 20 years to get something as musical as I own

 

I've been down the DSD camp and upsampling everything and gone back to just leaving the music alone with out and sampling.

 

As for cables, I've heard cables costing over £100k in a system worth £50k and when it's been reverted to its ordinary cables, which are still worth a few grand, it sounded lifeless and very boring

 

The other brilliant thing our ears is once we are used to the sound, we forget what it once heard from that same system

 

As for my system, it's good enough for my ears and practical enough for my needs too. Like most, it's a compromise, but I feel it's a good one to compete some systems costing twice it's price by matching things right and yes using the best cables without going to daft

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

[Solstice380]

Bottom line is your drawing your conclusions from sighted listening. The human brain is the easiest thing in the world to fool. Until you can support your claim thru bias controled blind listening giving a very high percentage of accurate responses, what you think you hear is worthless and has no place in scientific investigations. All further talk of soundstaging and how to measure it is without value.

Just cause you heard it don't make it so.

 

You are going to make it to some people's list!

 

Unless you have a lab with a boat load of equipment, none of us are doing science buddy. I do science for a living. I do music to get out of that. We all do what we do for different reasons. You have a lab with a boat load of equipment? If not, your just spewing spit like everyone else. Get over yourself.