Are "audiophile grade" wall outlets worth $50 or more?

[Jud]

Thanks for your questions. Here are the answers I know of:

 

What 'sonic differences' what would they be and what are the defining attributes? Why would they be present in sighted testing but disappear with the inverse?

 

1 - Not differences in loudness. People are very good at A/B-ing those, to such a degree that even when not consciously aware of small loudness differences they will consistently pick the slightly louder selection as sounding better.

 

2 - Not differences in pitch. People aren't as good at this as loudness, but then I wouldn't expect pitch differences from something like wall receptacles.

 

So that's what the differences would *not* be. As far as what they *might* be, there are any number of descriptive terms for audio reproduction that people have used to describe what they hear from these outlets, such as more clarity, openness and detail, better soundstage, etc. So let's group all these under the headings of freedom from low level noise (ground noise-EMI, RFI, various forms of distortion) and possibly phase effects. (I'm not saying these outlets change those things, or necessarily do anything at all, but from the descriptions, those would be what I can think of for possible causes.)

 

Find me a peer reviewed scientific article that stipulates that while bias controlled A/B testing is used for every other industry but audio is exempted.

 

Your premises are flawed in several respects. First, while bias-controlled testing is used in *some* other industries, it is by no means used in "all." Second, in areas such as medicine, bias controlled testing is used to control for a well understood, identified, measured effect (placebo effect), and there is reliable *objective* testing for the data being sought (e.g., lab tests); in audio the very thing being tested for is a subjective impression. Third, in science, engineering, etc., the efficacy of a test must be shown, *then* you are entitled to rely on its results. Would you use measuring equipment that hadn't been tested and found (in some cases certified) to be accurate?

 

Why would me wiring a dual gang outlet off of a same circuit using one of each outlet not work for finding out those differences?

 

That's what research in the academic journals will tell you.

 

Anyhow, I offered the money, now go get it if you care to.

[Jud]

I'm not sure what homeopathy is but I would give almost exclusive consideration to someone who tried it rather than a medical expert with no experience with it. I care about the result. I have no interest in what some alleged expert has to say about something they have no experience with. Let him/her go contribute to a medical journal where I don't have to hear about it.

 

Bill

 

Homeopathy says, among other things, that (1) diluting something makes it *more* powerful, and (2) water has "memory," so even if a substance isn't in the water now, it can still act through the water's memory of it. These two principles result in many homeopathic remedies being almost entirely H2O.

[bluesman]

I am using wires connectors to eliminate outlets. No soldering too.

Then you need my latest start-up product - GatorNutz, the original audiophile wire nuts!

 

Remember our slogan -

 

[plissken]

 

 

Anyhow, I offered the money, now go get it if you care to.

 

Authors: Lipshitz, Stanley P.; Vanderkooy, John

Affiliation: University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada

JAES Volume 29 Issue 7/8 pp. 482-491; August 1981

Publication Date:August 1, 1981 Import into BibTeX

Permalink: AES E-Library » The Great Debate: Subjective Evaluation

 

I'll PM you with where to send the $100.

[esldude]

Thanks for your questions. Here are the answers I know of:

 

 

 

1 - Not differences in loudness. People are very good at A/B-ing those, to such a degree that even when not consciously aware of small loudness differences they will consistently pick the slightly louder selection as sounding better.

 

2 - Not differences in pitch. People aren't as good at this as loudness, but then I wouldn't expect pitch differences from something like wall receptacles.

 

So that's what the differences would *not* be. As far as what they *might* be, there are any number of descriptive terms for audio reproduction that people have used to describe what they hear from these outlets, such as more clarity, openness and detail, better soundstage, etc. So let's group all these under the headings of freedom from low level noise (ground noise-EMI, RFI, various forms of distortion) and possibly phase effects. (I'm not saying these outlets change those things, or necessarily do anything at all, but from the descriptions, those would be what I can think of for possible causes.)

 

 

 

Your premises are flawed in several respects. First, while bias-controlled testing is used in *some* other industries, it is by no means used in "all." Second, in areas such as medicine, bias controlled testing is used to control for a well understood, identified, measured effect (placebo effect), and there is reliable *objective* testing for the data being sought (e.g., lab tests); in audio the very thing being tested for is a subjective impression. Third, in science, engineering, etc., the efficacy of a test must be shown, *then* you are entitled to rely on its results. Would you use measuring equipment that hadn't been tested and found (in some cases certified) to be accurate?

 

 

 

That's what research in the academic journals will tell you.

 

Anyhow, I offered the money, now go get it if you care to.

 

Of course in virtually every offered tweak, based upon virtually every offered premise, uncontrolled listening by audiophiles describes :

 

......... more clarity, openness and detail, better soundstage, etc.

 

So much so it is beyond simple cliche status. Everything matters and it matters in just these ways.

[Jud]

Authors: Lipshitz, Stanley P.; Vanderkooy, John

Affiliation: University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada

JAES Volume 29 Issue 7/8 pp. 482-491; August 1981

Publication Date:August 1, 1981 Import into BibTeX

Permalink: AES E-Library » The Great Debate: Subjective Evaluation

 

I'll PM you with where to send the $100.

 

Do you really not understand how science works? From the abstract:

 

We argue that highly controlled tests are necessary to transform subjective evaluation to an objective plane so that preferences and bias can be eliminated, in the quest for determining the accuracy of an audio component. In order for subjective tests to be meaningful to others, the following should be observed. (1) There must be technical competence to prevent obvious and/or subtle effects from affecting the test. (2) Linear differences must be thoroughly excised before conclusions about nonlinear errors can be reached. (3) The subjective judgment required in the test must be simple, such as the ability to discriminate between two components, using an absolute reference wherever possible. (4) The test must be blind or preferably double-blind. To implement such tests we advocate the use of A/B switchboxes. The box itself can be tested for audibly intrusive effects, and several embellishments are described which allow double-blind procedures to be used in listening tests. We believe that the burden of proof must lie with those who make new hypotheses regarding subjective tests.

 

Sorry, but argument, advocacy and belief is not evidence that this sort of testing works, or what specific sonic attributes it works for.

 

There are in fact papers in peer-reviewed scientific journals (in which I wouldn't include AES) using evidence to prove that A/B testing works for loudness variations, for example. So it's not as if no one's done scientific research in the area of A/B testing and recognition of aspects of sound in humans.

 

By the way, something I intended to mention in my last comment and forgot: I don't think sighted testing is at all free from problems. It's got the obvious issue of potential bias, often in ways we don't consciously realize. (For example, studies show if you ask for answers along a numbered continuum, e.g., 1-10, where people also have the choice of selecting choices halfway between the numbers - responses that would be "4 1/2," "5 1/2," etc., if they were labeled, which they aren't - that people will overwhelmingly select the choices with numbers attached. We like our choices to have names. There's a closely related bias that if we have choices that are labeled progressively - A1, A2...B1, B2...C1..., etc. - we're unconsciously biased toward the "highest" choice, be that A1 or C9 in a particular progression.) On the basis of the reading I've done in the academic literature, I don't think the dividing line is between sighted and blind testing, but elsewhere.

[Jud]

Of course in virtually every offered tweak, based upon virtually every offered premise, uncontrolled listening by audiophiles describes :

 

......... more clarity, openness and detail, better soundstage, etc.

 

So much so it is beyond simple cliche status. Everything matters and it matters in just these ways.

 

Indeed.

 

I'll PM you on a related topic of interest.

[plissken]

Do you really not understand how science works? From the abstract:

 

 

 

Sorry, but argument, advocacy and belief is not evidence that this sort of testing works, or what specific sonic attributes it works for.

 

There are in fact papers in peer-reviewed scientific journals (in which I wouldn't include AES) using evidence to prove that A/B testing works for loudness variations, for example. So it's not as if no one's done scientific research in the area of A/B testing and recognition of aspects of sound in humans.

 

By the way, something I intended to mention in my last comment and forgot: I don't think sighted testing is at all free from problems. It's got the obvious issue of potential bias, often in ways we don't consciously realize. (For example, studies show if you ask for answers along a numbered continuum, e.g., 1-10, where people also have the choice of selecting choices halfway between the numbers - responses that would be "4 1/2," "5 1/2," etc., if they were labeled, which they aren't - that people will overwhelmingly select the choices with numbers attached. We like our choices to have names. There's a closely related bias that if we have choices that are labeled progressively - A1, A2...B1, B2...C1..., etc. - we're unconsciously biased toward the "highest" choice, be that A1 or C9 in a particular progression.) On the basis of the reading I've done in the academic literature, I don't think the dividing line is between sighted and blind testing, but elsewhere.

 

 

They are making a thesis statement. They are indeed arguing that you need bias controlled testing and they have written a peer reviewed paper about it. It even goes into detail.

 

If AES isn't an authoritative enough body for you then there won't be one.

 

So are you whelching, I presume, on the $100?

[Jud]

They are making a thesis statement. They are indeed arguing that you need bias controlled testing and they have written a peer reviewed paper about it. It even goes into detail.

 

If AES isn't an authoritative enough body for you then there won't be one.

 

So are you whelching, I presume, on the $100?

 

Cranks "go into detail." (Some have even gotten peer-reviewed papers published.)

 

I'll accept AES Journal if (1) this article was peer-reviewed - not all AES Journal articles are; and (2) they provide actual evidence proving A/B testing works in humans for the types of sonic attributes I described above. If they do, I can tell you it contradicts decades of studies in peer-reviewed scientific journals. Research hint: "echoic memory."

[plissken]

A/B testing works in humans for the types of sonic attributes I described above. If they do, I can tell you it contradicts decades of studies in peer-reviewed scientific journals. Research hint: "echoic memory."

 

What is your premise for PRAT existing in the void of any controlled testing or measurement ability to ascertain it?

 

As a subjectivist one can't have it both ways. If it's there when you know what is it plugged in you should know if don't know if it's plugged in.

 

Why would I trust any person gushing about an outlet if they can't do it blinded. It in no way subtracts from what is coming out of the loudspeaker.

[Jud]

What is your premise for PRAT existing in the void of any controlled testing or measurement ability to ascertain it?

 

As a subjectivist one can't have it both ways. If it's there when you know what is it plugged in you should know if don't know if it's plugged in.

 

Why would I trust any person gushing about an outlet if they can't do it blinded. It in no way subtracts from what is coming out of the loudspeaker.

 

As I mentioned above, I'm not saying sighted testing is necessarily superior in this regard. I pointed out several problems that sighted testing is subject to. But these facts don't then require the conclusion that blinded testing is effective for these purposes. It must stand or fall on the basis of evidence, just as any other testing method must.

[plissken]

As I mentioned above, I'm not saying sighted testing is necessarily superior in this regard. I pointed out several problems that sighted testing is subject to. But these facts don't then require the conclusion that blinded testing is effective for these purposes. It must stand or fall on the basis of evidence, just as any other testing method must.

 

So are you saying it's not testable? Is this the only theory that can be posited?

[AnotherSpin]

Homeopathy says, among other things, that (1) diluting something makes it *more* powerful, and (2) water has "memory," so even if a substance isn't in the water now, it can still act through the water's memory of it. These two principles result in many homeopathic remedies being almost entirely H2O.

 

Both homeopathy and allopathy has its good and bad sides. I know personally some cases of successful implementation of homeopathy treatment. The most serious case was when one of my very close relatives declined an emergency surgery which was firmly suggested by three surgeons independently in three different clinics and finally set for homeopathy treatment. It was a success, confirmed after several months by series of thorough analysis, ultrasound scanning, etc. It was not a runny nose, but serious internal problem with very bad symptoms. I understand many people would consider it very non-scientific.

[AnotherSpin]

Then you need my latest start-up product - GatorNutz, the original audiophile wire nuts!

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]28481[/ATTACH]

Remember our slogan -

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]28482[/ATTACH]

Do you offer discounts for early adopters? And, do you sell those nice species who sit inside separately?

[mansr]

Both homeopathy and allopathy has its good and bad sides. I know personally some cases of successful implementation of homeopathy treatment. The most serious case was when one of my very close relatives declined an emergency surgery which was firmly suggested by three surgeons independently in three different clinics and finally set for homeopathy treatment. It was a success, confirmed after several months by series of thorough analysis, ultrasound scanning, etc. It was not a runny nose, but serious internal problem with very bad symptoms. I understand many people would consider it very non-scientific.

 

I'll counter your anecdote with another, that of Steve Jobs. He refused conventional treatment for his cancer, opting for some "alternative" therapy instead. He died.

[esldude]

I'll counter your anecdote with another, that of Steve Jobs. He refused conventional treatment for his cancer, opting for some "alternative" therapy instead. He died.

Some might consider that a success.

[gmgraves]

I was simply calling bull on your claim that you "did try it" in reference to an audiophile grade outlet.

 

 

 

 

Of course you know that different metals have different electrical conductivity ratings. Certainly the cheap metal parts in outlets purchased from the hardware store are rated lower than the metal parts in good audiophile outlets.

 

I use a Wattgate outlet that features metal parts that go through what they refer to as a "Three Layer Plating Process". Certainly the metal in their outlets will have better electrical connectivity and greater corrosion and wear resistance than the crap outlet one can buy at Home Depot.

 

This is another of these "The physics be damned, I heard a difference, so there is a difference." arguments again! One would be much better off with a "power conditioner" from the likes of PS Audio or Furman and even those aren't as effective as a good isolation transformer with multi-pole noise filters on both the primary and secondary windings.

[AnotherSpin]

I'll counter your anecdote with another, that of Steve Jobs. He refused conventional treatment for his cancer, opting for some "alternative" therapy instead. He died.

1. It was not an anecdote. In any case I do not see a reason to prove anything for you. 2. I heard about Steve Jobs. Did you hear about people who died after allopathy treatments?

[esldude]

1. It was not an anecdote. In any case I do not see a reason to prove anything for you. 2. I heard about Steve Jobs. Did you hear about people who died after allopathy treatments?

 

So you also don't understand what an anecdote is? Okay, your post about successful treatment was anecdotal. Doesn't matter if the persons treated survived with this treatment it still is anecdotal.

[christopher3393]

Sometimes placebos work, depending on how you define "work". Here, the listener's state of mind including factors like expectations is key. Is it possible that in some situations, in a carefully qualified way, expectation bias can be a good thing?

 

Very suggestive article: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/10/opinion/sunday/a-placebo-treatment-for-pain.html

 

The author has a phd. in genetics and microbiology. I've just started reading her recent book. Very interesting! https://www.amazon.com/dp/0385348150/ref=rdr_ext_tmb

 

(This is not to suggest that hearing improvement from a high-grade outlet is simply mind-over-body or only mind-over-body. I personally remain open to the possibility that something not-yet-explained is happening. Why? Because people whom I trust and respect as audiophiles and music lovers have told me about their positive experiences. Now this, of course is subjective. I prefer to think of it as inter-subjective and suggestive. It is not meant to qualify as an objective challenge, nor to disrespect those who find good reason to be skeptical about audiophile-grade outlets like the Furutech.)

[lmitche]

Funny, just this Friday I replaced the 30 year old audio outlet in my new abobe with a Hubbell IG5362 outlet for my audio system. Total cost $24 on Amazon. While I was at it, I replaced the molded power plug on my Tripplite 1500 watt HG isolation transformer with a hospital grade model also made by Hubbell, $12.

 

As I am in the initial speaker placement and setup stage it is tough to tell how much the outlet and plug addition is contributing to the outstanding musical performance that I am now enjoying. I don't care, for $36 this upgrade is a no brainer. It is hard to believe the superior mechanical grip and brass connections are not making a contribution.

 

The new home has Romex cable and plastic electrical boxes. My previous home had metal boxes and metal clad BX cable. Back there, running a dedicated line and adding a similar Hubbell IG outlet made a significant difference in SQ. So based on that experience and given the low cost, I did the same here without batting an eye.

[AnotherSpin]

So you also don't understand what an anecdote is? Okay, your post about successful treatment was anecdotal. Doesn't matter if the persons treated survived with this treatment it still is anecdotal.

English is not my mother tongue. If you want we could speak on Russian or Ukrainian, which both are. Anyway, google gives such definition of anecdote: "an account regarded as unreliable or hearsay". In Russian "anecdote" has the same meaning.

[lmitche]

And if you thought for a second that replacing an AC receptacle is extreme audiophilia, this article shows that what we are talking about here is very bush (minor) league.

 

https://www.engadget.com/2016/08/15/japan-audiophiles-install-own-electricity-poles/

[Don Hills]

... PRAT ...

 

Every time I see this phrase, I am irresistibly drawn to the conclusion that the utterer is one. :-)

[Jud]

Every time I see this phrase, I am irresistibly drawn to the conclusion that the utterer is one. :-)

 

One does wonder about the possible ulterior motives of the person who first used the acronym.