Everything sounds the same

[firedog]

38 minutes ago, mansr said:

All components (and cables) sound exactly alike. There are no differences between a $5 clock radio and the finest system money can buy. If you have evidence to the contrary, you are not permitted to say so in this thread. We're like our beliefs and wish to keep them undisturbed by reality.

Weak satire and not really relevant.
 

No one said you aren't "allowed"  to post what you want. 
 

The question you should be asking yourself: why do you feel compelled to continue to devote reams of posts on the same topic, year after year, thread after thread, when the available evidence suggests you've convinced no one from the other "camp"?

Sort of ironic for an "evidence based" objectivist.

To most of us the arguments are old and tiresome - no matter what we think about the actual topic.

That's why I suggested writing a "sticky" instead of continually arguing the same point, which apparently brings absolutely no added value to the site each time it is argued. Instead, you can just point newbies to the sticky if you wish to educate them. 
 

Beyond that, when someone starts a thread by stating he wants a discussion about the sound of various USB cables, and specifically isn't interested in hearing from those who don't think the differences exist (maybe because he doesn't want to re-read the same argument again, and not because he is lacking in "education") - then it is disrespectful and rude to derail his thread and turn it into another "can cables make a difference?" argument.
 

And that is true even if you are CORRECT. First you may be correct, but there isn't exactly a way for you to prove you are correct to those who don't accept your ideas of proof. And to the OP it is irrelevant, as apparently he hears differences and that's what is important to him. He's not interested in you telling him he's imagining it.

It's not a moral imperative for you to convince everyone to accept your point of view - you need to learn to accept that sometimes people have a point of view, won't accept what you consider proof of your POV, aren't interested in being convinced otherwise, you can't convince them, and it is tiresome to most of the community here to read about it again and again.

[firedog]

Just now, mansr said:

Go away. Nobody here wants to hear your rational arguments.

Now THAT was funny. 

[firedog]

On the lighter side, there is a "non-scientific" side to this: Most of us are well aware of the pernicious effects of the disease known as "audiophilia nervosa", or in layman's terms as "upgrade-itis". 
It is psychologically difficult for many to accept that their system is optimal and some new piece of equipment or "tweak" won't improve it.  Sometimes it is more useful in the real world to try something like a cable and if it "seems" to make a positive difference, just to accept that it does - even if you "know" it isn't rational. It can calm the "nervosa" - b/c in the end if you think it sounds better - it does.
Fortunately or unfortunately, that's how our brains work. Few can carry out a true scientifically valid test of most devices anyway - and few well run tests have been carried out at all, even by professionals. So we are left with doing the best we can and accepting the results. Ain't much that can really be done about it. 

[firedog]

1 hour ago, gmgraves said:

OK let's set a hypothetical case.  Let's say that some newbie reads Mansr's sarcastic remark that everything sounds alike and believes it? Unlikely, but this is just an example, so it really doesn't matter. He reads that remark and says to himself, "well if everything sounds the same, then I'll just stick with my dad's old console stereo from the early 1960's. No need to spend any money on Hi-fi!" Yes, absurdly hypothetical but the point is that newbies come here all the time, read some of the nonsense posted here (as well as some of the wisdom) and have no idea what is right and what is wishful thinking. it is the duty of everyone here (in my estimation) to give both sides of the story in any controversial discussion. If I say cables have no sound, those who believe that there is need to voice their opinion that I'm wrong, and why. It is then up to the newbie, given two sides of an argument to then go off on his own realizing that there are possibly two equally sincere points of view on the subject and research the topic on his own.  

And nothing I wrote contradicts your position. It makes no sense every time someone asks about cables to write the same endless arguments over and over again.It’s a topic that’s been beaten to death hundreds of times here.  That’s why I suggested Mansr, Sal, and others write a sticky thread with their position and simply refer people to it. Or set up a cable debate thread and debate it there. Refer newbies to it. No reason to continually hijckack multiple threads Into  the same argument. Especially when the OP in the other thread was obviously aware of the argument and specifically asked that his question not be turned into such a debate. 

[firedog]

5 hours ago, MetalNuts said:

I wonder the reason of posting a thread in a forum if it is not for discussion and expression.  Is it a propaganda who try to brainwash others?

Just because someone posts a question it doesn't mean he's interested in anything somehow related. There's also a value in having a focussed discussion.
I'm normally fine with discussion and even meandering, but in the particular case in question the OP specifically said he didn't want to get into the cable debate, but wanted others' suggestions about cables. The OP wanted some suggestions of how different cables might sound. 

 

If I come onto  a food forum and ask for directions about how to fry chicken, it's rude to start lecturing me about why I should be a vegetarian. Do egos have to be so big and unrestrained online that that isn't obvious? That debate shouldn't be in that thread. 

I'm not sure how you jump from there to "propaganda" and attempts to "brainwash".  What should be common courtesy isn't brainwashing. Adults who feel passionately about a topic should be mature enough to deal with the fact that the OP isn't interested in the cable debate and refrain from turning his thread into something the opposite of what he wanted. They can have the debate somewhere else on the site. How is that brainwashing?

[firedog]

16 minutes ago, mansr said:

Flawed analogy. The USB cable thread was more akin to someone going to a food forum and asking which brand of salt tastes better, the $100/kg or the $500/kg. When someone points out that the $1/kg salt is exactly the same, he gets angry.

No. Not when the OP specifically said he didn't want the cable debate and posters telling him there was no difference.
Is your ego so big you feel you must answer, even when specifically asked not to? 

And your analogy is wrong. The OP clearly stated he wanted to hear about the different sounds of USB cables, so he at least thinks he hears differences. It doesn't matter whether you think he can hear them or not. It's irrelevant to his experience and question.
 

As far as salt, different types of salt can have different trace elements, and different grain/crystal sizes. This can make a difference in how their taste is perceived, and how they and their aroma are released into the food, which also changes the taste. Are you not aware that foods can be perceived as different tasting for no other reason than the size of them on the tongue? That affects aspects of taste such as how fast our saliva reacts with the food and how the aromas are released. Both of those change our subjective perception of taste. 

Another failed cooking comparison from you. You apparently don't know much about cooking. I'd suggest you look for a different type of analogy next time. 
 

 

 

[firedog]

19 minutes ago, mansr said:

Flawed analogy. The USB cable thread was more akin to someone going to a food forum and asking which brand of salt tastes better, the $100/kg or the $500/kg. When someone points out that the $1/kg salt is exactly the same, he gets angry.

Anyway, for you, I'll change it. If I go onto a food forum and ask about how to cook fried chicken, and specifically state that I'm only interested in hearing about frying methods, and not about other aspects of  fried chicken, such as how some think it is unhealthy or it's not the most tasty way to cook chicken.
The it is rude and silly to start telling me that fried chicken isn't good, isn't healthy, and reasons I shouldn't make it. If you want to do that, then start an anti-fried foods thread. 

[firedog]

7 minutes ago, mansr said:

Are you suggesting the water in the food remembers the size of salt grains after they have dissolved.

No. You apparently have little idea of how taste works. A simple physical change (not chemical and not ingredients) in the size or shape of food can change how we perceive the taste. This is well established.

To be brief, it's related to relative surface area, how saliva (which is part of food digestion) interacts with food, and how aromas are released (smell is thought to be as much as 80%of what we call taste). 

So specifically with salt  as an example; typical table salt can have a different taste than a much larger grained salt such as kosher salt. Both are chemically identical, but the different physical properties can change how they taste to us. And even when cooked, it depends at what point in the cooking the salt is added. Some recipes specifically call for the salt to be of a certain type or to be added at a certain point in the preparation. That changes our perception of the taste of the salt. 

Friendly suggestion: give it up. You blew it trying to dig your way out of a false baking comment not too long ago, and now you are trying it again with cooking. Kitchen skills apparently aren't a strong part of your knowledge base. Try analogies in area where you know what you are talking about. 

[firedog]

Just now, PeterSt said:

 

Wrong. The spread in the food is very different for the larger grains vs the smaller, no matter the total weight is equal.

Indeed you are no cook. Nobody cares. But of course you are telling the cook that you know better.

Good thread.

Absolutely correct.

[firedog]

20 minutes ago, mansr said:

That is true provided the grains enter the mouth while solid. If they are dissolved in food during its preparation, there will be no difference.

 

You started it with your flawed chicken example.

 

Your insults are unwelcome and quite ironic given the context of this thread. Now, please go away.

Rich, coming from you as probably the most established serial insulter on the site. 

What we see in both the cable thread and this one is that you feel compelled to argue and be right, even when you clearly aren't. You did the same thing before with your incorrect cake comment. 

Have you ever noticed I don't argue with you about electronics and engineering? Because clearly your knowledge is greater than mine. 

But also clearly, you use false food analogies based on ignorance, and are unable to admit that you are wrong. And then you say "go away" because you don't know what you are talking about and can't deal with being called on it. So you can dish it out,  but can't take it. 

And as far as the topic at hand, you still are unable to give me a cogent reason why it's so imperative to derail a thread like the other posters USB query. Is your ego so fragile that you can't live without telling him how he's wrong, even when he's specifically asked not to be drawn into that discussion? 

[firedog]

Just now, mansr said:

Are you seriously claiming that if 1 gram of salt is dissolved in 1 litre of water and stirred, there will be some difference depending on the grain size of the salt? Do you also believe in homoeopathy?

Recipe calls for 1 gram of salt. 
I add one gram of fine grained table salt in at the beginning of the cooking process.

Make simultaneously another batch and add one gram of kosher salt in 2 minutes before the dish is plated and served. 
In both cases the salt is dissolved. 
The two dishes don't taste the same. 
Can you figure out why? 

[firedog]

Hey, I don't care about your childish outbursts. Keep answering. I'll  answer back just to annoy you, b/c you've asked for it. 

[firedog]

6 hours ago, MetalNuts said:

Did I misunderstand the title  and the context of the initial post of this thread?  Where are the words to let you think he wanted others' suggestion about cables in contradiction to the title?

the post is a sarcastic reaction to another thread where the OP asked about USB cable suggestions and specifically asked not to debate cables, and the post became a debate about cables

[firedog]

Real question: in a digital setup, why would anyone want to use a cable to color their sound instead of DSP? With  DSP you can see exactly what changes you are making and understand the relationship between the changes and what you hear.

With the cable you never understand exactly what is happening and why, and whether the result is a one off applicable only to a very specific setup. 

[firedog]

27 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

I wrote a very ling essay of which I decided to keep it put not post. So let me stick to :

 

Nothing is coloring. I even said so explicitly, of course assuming that everybody knows what "coloring" as such is.

The Lush^1 is just a cable.

The JSSG 360 tweak is just "a" tweak and it makes the Lush^1 sound better.

The Lush^2 is a 10,000+ cables, with configurations which sound better than the original Lush^1 and also better than the JSSG 360 variant which in the end is only one of those 10,000+ variants.

 

Of course, those who are pertinent about a USB cable not being able to influence SQ anyway, will also not be able to understand. So they didn't even start reading this. OK.

But those who are interested and have the experience that the USB cable indeed influences SQ (or the sound in general) may wonder which situation actually is the one with least distortion. Is it the $1 cable ? is the the Supra ? the Curious ? the XYZ^2^2 ? The Clairixa then ? (it should be because it was made for that).

 

What all of these cables have in common for "variance" is their focus on a frequency range. And these can even be "several". For now think reflections. And yes, I know, it is a digital cable (application).

 

Generally I have been talking about emphasis to the mid, to the low-highs (which I somehow don't call high-mid), the highs and also the bass. Yeah, that seems all together. But the stupidity of the thing is that when the emphasis goes to the bass alone, you may have better bass (not coloring) but less mid and highs because that is how it works out. So the skill is to find a configuration where (e.g.) a voice is not singing on its own because the bass lines are there for a reason just the same.

 

Of course we can't tune for a voice etc. And of course that could better be done with DSP. One thing : DSP destroys (it would be the clear contrary of what I hunt for, starting with non-ringing filters) and this is not destructive at all. Unless, of course, we select a configuration of the shielding where all the highs are muffled.

Anyway, similar to Operating System tweaks, this is nothing like bass and treble knobs and also nothing like the best PEQs and room correction and what not.

So it is just many cables, and one may color more than the other if that is really how you like to interpret it. Ditch the one which colors too much. Keep the one with the best mid, if that is what you're after.

Or wait until someone finds "that cable" which has all good.

 

Having said this all, why would anyone want to use a cable to color their sound instead of DSP? -> because a. I don't like DSP and b. because DSP would be dialing in the blind (unless with room correction which I also don't like) and merely :

c. because we're after the best reproduction. This is not about adding color - it is about removing it.

 

Ad c., example :

If a combo with bass and voice play together, someone (like a sound engineer) should have set them up so that the one does not overvoice the other. And for example, when the bass with say 50Hz shows 2nd harmonic distortion, it will show 100Hz and interferes with the voice which also plays there. This, while in reality both did not interfere. The trick for this example is thus the undistorted bass and not letting the voice come forward. That would work too, but it will not imply the proper balance.

 

Peter

 

 

Thanks for your thorough answer. 
We will have agree to disagree on one point: I'd still call what the cable does coloring. I understand why you don't. We have a different definition of what the word means in this context.

[firedog]

22 hours ago, wwaldmanfan said:

 

I saw McDonald's on the Av. des Champs-Élysées in Paris 35 years ago, and the line was out the door. This surprised me. Either it was an "American novelty" back then, or there for the benefit of foreign tourists too intimidated to appreciate the unique local cuisine. I have a friend like that and it ultimately cost him his first marriage. His wife was a gourmet cook. His favorite food is hot dogs. She remarried someone more sophisticated, and moved to Switzerland, and he's now on wife #3.

France is  McDonalds' second best market after the US  and it is very successful there. France is not the same as it was 40 years ago.
https://www.businessinsider.com/how-mcdonalds-conquered-france-2014-8?op=1

https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2012/01/24/145698222/why-mcdonalds-in-france-doesnt-feel-like-fast-food

[firedog]

2 hours ago, gmgraves said:

I'm not sure that's correct. While I love a real Neapolitan Margharita,, I also love a good NY style pie, and have been known to order delivery from Dominos, Pizza-Hut, and Roundtable. Not great, surely, but when you're hungry....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pizza_in_the_United_States

Other than going to Naples and getting a "traditional" style pie, you'd have a hard time saying what an "authentic" pizza is anymore. Even in Italy they've been influenced by NY and other US style pizzas. 
 

Clearly it evolved in the US and immigrants from Italy were some of those that pushed the evolution (inventing Chicago style is one example). 
It is sort of like audio, IMO - whatever you like is good. You don't have to justify your taste to anyone.

[firedog]

10 hours ago, esldude said:

https://foodfornet.com/7-tips-to-make-your-charcoal-pizza-oven-bake-even-better-pizza/

 

https://www.kettlepizza.com/kettle-ovens/

 

Some people do use charcoal for pizzas.  

Many home ovens don't really get hot enough to do pizza properly. Most charcoal grills can get very hot; I've done pizza on a grill and it works very well. You just have to be careful b/c it is ready much faster than in most ovens.