Suggestion: ban all cable debates

[Jud]

Counter suggestion: Don't read or participate in those threads.

 

 

Plus start or continue other threads on subjects closer to your liking. (I think buried in the threads that Keith_W is talking about are some valuable posts and discussions, but one has to wade through a fair amount of "noise" to get to the "signal" there, so I do understand the complaint.)

[Jud]

Actually, I don't. I open them every now and then and marvel at how unproductive these types of threads are. If you want to hear something objective, how about this: cable debates are as old as the internet itself. There will be no resolution. There will be no way forward.

 

I agree with everything here except the very last sentence, and the latter is only because I've always been an optimist.

 

Tell me again why people object to others buying cables? They think it is a futile waste of time? I can think of something else that is a futile waste of time.

 

[Jud]

So why don't we see similar debates regarding expensive vs. cheap speakers?

 

We don't?

[Jud]

I think a good point Keith_W raised is that many of us love to heartily debate and discuss, but since this is after all an audio forum, we should try as far as we can to have an audio discussion rather than score debating points or get into personal remarks. If we do a good job, someone reading the thread later should be able to get food for thought about audio from most of the comments, regardless of the particular viewpoints of the commenters.

[Jud]

Hi Jud

 

While I sincerely appreciate your reliable, "let's make lemonade" approach, the OP is trolling. He came here with an explicit desire to squash opinions he see as contrary to his own. His concerns about "tone" are just window dressing for his intolerance. YMMV, of course.

 

There seems to be some contingents of posters that feel their path is the correct one, and it is their duty to protect and inform others they are lost without the guidance and inputs from their particular contingent.

 

Both of you guys make lots of valuable and interesting contributions, but IMHO these particular comments illustrate the problem of taking an audio discussion and making it about personalities.

[Jud]

We don't seem to have any debates where one "side" says the laws of physics would have to be violated for one speaker to sound better than another. No one suggests that it is not possible for two well-made speakers to sound very different (unlike with various wires, files with identical checksums, and so forth). It is a fundamentally different sort of discussion, which really comes down to whether people think one speaker simply sounds better than another, or whether the price warrants the improvement, etc.

 

(I would much rather spend $5K upgrading my speakers than $5K on wire. With some careful shopping, I am pretty certain I could get a major and readily audible improvement in sound with better speakers, whereas I think the chances of improving my sound with more expensive (allegedly better) cables is extremely remote.)

 

Good and valid points.

 

Consider on the other hand someone like me: I already have speakers I like very much, purchased used for $2500, and am not much interested in changing (unless it would be to the Vandersteen Quatro Wood CT at nearly $14,000, which I could listen to until my wife found out and I was taken away in an ambulance).

 

Though certainly not what I would achieve with the Quatros, I thought (purely subjectively, of course) that I got a significant bump in sound quality by replacing my Audioquest Coffee USB cable with a Mapleshade USB cable at $135, about half the Coffee's price. The change was free, as I paid for the Mapleshade by selling the Coffee used. (Yes, this does mean I laid out nearly $300 for USB cables at the end of the day.)

 

I bought my DAC on sale for about $375, IIRC.

 

The next upgrades (after the first priority, getting our retirement home built and furnished and paying for the move), will very likely be to my laptop and desktop, which are 2009 and 2010 vintage, respectively, and somewhat limit the levels of upsampling I can do.

 

 

Edit: Actually, the next upgrade is likely to be purchase of a calibrated mic for about $80 and use of free REW software in association with finding the best location for the speakers in the new house.

 

 

The most expensive bits right now are the preamp and amp; if I ever bought or put together an nCore amp, then it would be the preamp alone.

 

I'm very happy with the system, or really, with the music.

 

Did I violate accepted wisdom about where to put most of the money in a system? Yep. But I love the music I'm listening to, and that's supposed to be the object as far as I can tell.

 

Did I possibly waste a couple of hundred bucks on cables? Sure, it's possible. But there's the old joke about the parents who approach a psychiatrist about their son, who thinks he's a chicken. Even when he says he's confident he can cure the boy, they're hesitant, and he asks why. "We like the eggs," says the father. So even if the improvement I think I'm hearing from a $135 cable is impossible, I guess I like the eggs.

[Jud]

That's usually after I've already given a more elaborate response two or three times and the person still persists in spouting variations of the same nonsense, whatever it might be. Maybe it's better to say nothing in those situations, but I really dislike seeing blatant misinformation stand uncontested.

 

 

You could I suppose refer people to your previous more elaborate response.

 

 

But there are very few of us here who cannot plead guilty to being cryptic every so often (though in my case the sin is more often in the other direction ).

[Jud]

Have (or develop) a thick skin and you will generally find visiting hobbyist/enthusiast web fora to be a much more enjoyable experience.

 

This forum is a veritable rainbows, sprinkles and kittens sort of place compared to the Jeep/skiing/rock climbing fora I frequent. Posters on those fora get spanked and mercilessly ridiculed for little or no reason on the regular, because... well, just because. After a while, you don't even mind or notice the rude behavior. In fact you sort of miss it when things get overly nice.

 

My suggestion (with peace, love and empathy)- suck it up and you will have more fun!

 

With hat tip to wgscott, the master:

 

 

[Jud]

In the thread that suggested banning the perpetual cable debates, cue the perpetual cable debate breaking out in 3, 2, 1,....

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

[Jud]

In the thread that suggested banning the perpetual cable debates, cue the perpetual cable debate breaking out in 3, 2, 1,....

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

 

Zero.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

[Jud]

This, sadly, is why we can't have nice things.

 

 

In several threads I've pointed out that an audio engineer who advocates forcefully for measurement as the basis for audio design, Bruno Putzeys, has said there are measurable differences between cables that no new or exotic physics is required to explain, and has described a couple of these measurable differences. See, for example, http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/poll-where-are-you-along-cable-divide-27916/index15.html#post643154 (Putzeys designs amps and DACs, not cables.) I think he believes these measurable differences result in audible differences, though I do not know what if any work he has done to confirm this. It would be a good thing to ask him. Perhaps in the not too distant future, if indeed there are measurable differences that correspond to sound quality, consumers could have standardized measurements for cables as we do for amps, DACs, etc.

 

 

A really good audio engineer who doesn't believe in hocus pocus has suggested a possibility that, if it proves out, might help audiophiles. Consumers could base decisions on real information instead of "objectivist" or "subjectivist" dogma. But perhaps people are more worried their longstanding positions might be proved wrong (cables might have real sonic differences, but the cables that are best in these measurable characteristics may not be the ones audiophiles pay hundreds or thousands of dollars for) than about actually learning something new or helping fellow hobbyists.

 

 

Am I wrong?

[Jud]

The flip side of this coin is that people change AC power cords "because they can"

 

Yeah, I just described doing that with a USB cable upthread.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

[Jud]

Nice of you to say. Upsetting to be told that my genuine nature (kind and generous / altruistic) is a sham. I don't need that type of negativity . . . and with the "ignore" feature, won't have to put up with it

 

Nor do you have to worry about anyone familiar with you on this forum believing it.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

[Jud]

So apologies if I caught you in the crossfire

 

A gentle and respectful suggestion: If you discuss rather than "fire," there is less need to apologize.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

[Jud]

about time for an epistemology argument...

 

First we have to get epist.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

[Jud]

Are you suggesting that Fire, ready , aim is not good methodology?

 

Was thinking more along these lines (HT to Monty Python):

 

Immanuel Kant was a real piss-ant who was very rarely stable,

Heidegger, Heidegger was a boozy beggar who could drink you under the table,

David Hume could out-consume Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel,

And Wittgenstein was a beery swine who was twice as sloshed as Schlegel.

 

There's nothing Nietzsche couldn't teach yer 'bout the raising of the wrist,

Socrates himself was permanently pissed.

 

John Stewart Mill, of his own free will, on half a pint of shandy was particularly ill,

Plato, they say, could stick it away, half a crate of whisky every day,

Aristotle, Aristotle was a bugger for the bottle, Hobbes was fond of his dram,

And Rene Descartes was a drunken fart: "I drink, therefore I am."

 

Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed -

A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

[Jud]

10 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

Toslink - how could this matter?

A few ways -

- Lower bandwidth than USB or coax, which could be problematic at higher resolutions and/or for multichannel

- Quality of manufacture of optical cables can be important (particularly things like correct termination), though to basic operation rather than subtleties of sound quality

- Conversion of optical signal to electrical in the DAC can be done in a more or less noisy way

- Jitter seems to be problematic for at least some Toslink setups (e.g., the old Airport Express used to put out more than a nanosecond jitter over its optical connection); remember this is SPDIF, so not under control of the DAC's clock

[Jud]

8 minutes ago, SamuelTCogley said:

I've spent lots of time over the years at other audio forums, and this is one of the seamier undersides of high end audio.  In my experience, some forum posters who fancied themselves as the Next Up And Coming Audiophile Social Media Personality would relentlessly flog a particular manufacturer's products (usually cables) and make it a point to be a visible shill at audio shows in an effort to get product either at a significant discount, or even for free.  Then to prime the pump even further, would post lots of pictures of the show in the form of a "report" (a "service" to fellow audiophiles) and be sure to name drop the A-Listers, with copious use of superlatives like, "awesome", "incredible", "mind blowing", etc.

Personally, if someone got a product for free, or at a discount because of their "relationship" with the vendor, their "honest" review of the product is nearly meaningless, if not completely so.

Having to use such methods would suggest very few folks are making money in the audiophile cable business (I grant you, not for lack of trying).  Either that, or substantially fewer folks are successful at getting free/discounted product than attempt to do so by this method.

[Jud]

1 minute ago, SamuelTCogley said:

My point is the high profit margin of boutique cables makes this possible.

1. Set high margin.

2. Profit!

(Just teasing.)

[Jud]

26 minutes ago, wwaldmanfan said:

Part of the reason to come here is to share experiences, and help each other cut through a lot of the BS that pervades this industry.

My parents used to think that if they read something in the newspaper, it must be true. Some people new to this hobby may be led to believe that a $500 cable is going to perform better than a $50 cable. 10x better? 2x better? I think I hear a difference after burning it in for 150 hours?

Only way to know without spending the cash is to try to draw a consensus from others who express opinions based on their own experiences. That info costs nothing, a good thing.

 

We need to recognize it is not necessarily a way to *know*.  Our eyes and ears may indeed be fooling us, and we simply need to be OK with that.

 

On the other hand, I have not seen  research that proves the efficacy of double blind testing in the case of audio cables, and I have seen research (and have provided a few citations here on the forums) that makes me think there could be a problem of false negatives.  So unless there's research proving efficacy that someone can point out to me, we should be OK with skepticism on that point.

 

As long as everyone's OK with due skepticism and doesn't treat his own view as conclusively proven, I think we're OK here.  Pace.

[Jud]

50 minutes ago, wgscott said:

 

There could be a problem with interpretation of negative results.  A negative result in that kind of double-blind test proves absolutely nothing, whereas a single positive statistically-valid and repeatable positive result would convince pretty much everyone that the cable skeptics are wrong.

 

A negative result just brings you back to the null hypothesis.

 

Publius

 

What if the test always tells you you're not pregnant?  (OK, not you personally....)  Is the problem then with interpretation of the negative results, or with the validity of the test?

[Jud]

1 minute ago, wgscott said:

 

No, I am reasonably content with the $15 stock ones that came with my low-brow, impoverished lumpenproletariat Di2 ultegra group.

 

A "Lumpenproletariat" bike sounds like a great brand to me, but where's there a tube long enough for the name?

[Jud]

3 minutes ago, wgscott said:

 

The thing about pregnancy is that it is objectively real, and can be measured using a simple ELISA pregnancy test.  We don't have to rely on a double-blind test, because everyone is in agreement that (a) pregnancy as a condition exists, and (b) it can be measured.

 

A double-blind test has nothing to measure except a contradiction of the null hypothesis (that cables with no measurable differences will sound identical).

 

Your jedi lawyer tricks no good here.

 

If we've already decided cable differences aren't objectively real (contra measurement fanatic audio engineer Bruno Putzeys) then "Test hardly needed is," as a short green wrinkly Jedi lawyer might say.

[Jud]

8 minutes ago, mansr said:

 

Moreover, 9 months later you can validate any earlier test result with certainty.

 

Or invalidate.  So far I've found quite a dearth of research into false negative rates for testing in the audio realm, though there has been interesting research on this for certain types of testing with which DBT in audio shares protocols.

[Jud]

11 minutes ago, elcorso said:

Maybe you could discover this when you "discover" conspiracy theories

 

Roch 

 

Kind of pertinent, as I'm at a legal meeting/seminar in DC listening to members of the current administration.