Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 29

Thread: DBT's and proof

  1. #1
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    727

    DBT's and proof

    What would be required to prove that two components that measure the same sound different via DBT? How many trials, how many different tests under what conditions, etc etc. How would such a DBT be set up? 30 second snatches of music?

    What are the parameters of a DBT that would prove to one and all that component A and component B sound different? Can anyone outline such a test?

  2. #2
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    538
    There are some DBT described on this site:
    http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm

    All that is required in a DBT is that the 'subjects' be able to correctly pick the component, wire, speaker, etc. that is actually being 'played' significantly better than they would do by random choice. If you are comparing two items, then the random choice is 50% correct selections. If the subjects do better by acheiving, say, 90% correct selections, then you have a positive result that a difference can be detected. Sigma levels can be introduced to quantify the 'tightness' of the result. 95% correct selections would be 'tighter' than 80% correct selections. This is sorta like the number of sigmas you have within a tolerance specified for a given manufacturing process, i.e. how repeatably your requested tolerances can be achieved in production. A tolerance of 1.000 +/- .005 with a 5 sigma process capability is 'tighter' than a tolerance of 1.000 +/- .005 with a 2.5 sigma process capability.

    The duration of each 'snapshot of exposure' can be anything within reason, but obviously the longer the snapshots the longer the overall DBT for a given number of trials.

  3. #3
    Suspended markw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Noo Joisey. Youse got a problem wit dat?
    Posts
    4,659

    That's kind of a loaded question.

    Even medical DBT's show that not all drugs work with all people. They can just got by the majority.

    Even so, in audio. every room person has different abilities, each room is different and on and on.

    All the best designed DBT could ever hope to prove is that most of the people tested heard no difference, or did hear a difference. From that point on, we could move into preferences.

    But ultimately, the only one that you have to prove anything to is yourself and you don't need a clinical DBT (with techs in white coats, clipboards, pocket protectors, etc.) to cometo your own conclusions.

    I've always been a believer in simple, no pressure, at home single blind tests if there is not a readily obvious difference. i.e. I doub anyone would dare say that a Realistic Minimus 7 and a Maggie 1.6. sound the same. One might say that there are some similarities under some conditions, but to confuse the two would be a stretch.

    Likewise for amps. I honestly believe that well designed amps running within their design limitations pretty similar. Now, some music may put demands on them that might stress one or the other beyond their design limits but that's bending the rules. The qualifier is "within their design limits". If you want that extra headroom, you step up to a more powerful amp.

    Wires are another story. I'd say that the point of diminishing returns is a lot lower than the hype would have you believe. For me to spend 10x or 100x the bucks on interconnects, particularly of the came construction, I'd want to be pretty durn sure that there's a viable difference. Fortunately, that's not impossible or difficult.

    Get that new wire. Live with it for a few days or weeks .Get used to it. When a got the new cable, I listened to everything very carefully and critically. Dang, this new cable was great! I hear things I neferheard before.

    ...Now, the fun begins.

    With a trusted friend who is willing to work with you and patience it can be done. fortunately, I had a skeptical audiobuddy cliose at hand. Have them switch, or not - depending, between two wires under test once a day when you are not home. Make sure they record what wire in active on what days.

    Now, all you have to do is to come home, enjoy whatever music you like at whatever level you like for as long as you like. no pressure... Simply record, in your own notebook, what wire you believe is playing on what day.

    Onething I noticed is that I hearda lot of those "new" sounds almost every day. Could it be he really didn't switch wires at all? Oh well, listen again.

    After about three weeks, compare notes. My test, although not scientific by nature, stated that 80% correct would have proven to me that I could consistently tell the difference and from then I would be able to make an educated "preference" decision. I got 12 out of 20 correct.

    Another thing this proved is that a LOT of stuff I hearrd with a new wire was always there. I just never bothered to listen "hard" enough to notice it before.

    So, all the testing in the world really won't "prove" anything to someone else. You gotta do it for yourself.

    I guess I'll end with a botched Ricky Nelson quote: "You can't please everyone so you've got to please yourself".

    enjoy...

  4. #4
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    538
    Re markw's comments

    Drug trials pose a far higher risk-reward value than any silly audiophile issue. The drug companies DBT use placebos (usually a dummy pill of some type) as a control in part of the test group to distinguish real drug results from results created in the subjects' imaginations. I remember one trial yielded a drug improvement-benefit of 49% in the test group while the placebo group taking the placebo pills achieved a 33% improvement-benefit. This did not seem to be a ringing success for that drug.

    DBT's are useful for screening what type(s) of components you should be spending your time and energy in order to select better components of that category to improve your sound system. Loudspeakers are clearly the 'biggest hitters' here. Of course, the question of 'what to prefer' always enters these discussions.

    'What to prefer' can really only be answered by attending a lot of acoustic-instrument recitals so as to lodge the voice (sound) of the real instruments in your acoustic memory- the same way your mother's voice is lodged in your acoustic memory. The specific people playing the instruments need to be competent, but listening to different artists will not pose a problem. You are learning the voice of the real instrument, not the artist.

  5. #5
    Suspended markw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Noo Joisey. Youse got a problem wit dat?
    Posts
    4,659
    Quote Originally Posted by Mash
    'What to prefer' can really only be answered by attending a lot of acoustic-instrument recitals so as to lodge the voice (sound) of the real instruments in your acoustic memory- the same way your mother's voice is lodged in your acoustic memory. The specific people playing the instruments need to be competent, but listening to different artists will not pose a problem. You are learning the voice of the real instrument, not the artist.
    Good point. One of the good things about living in Metropolis is the tremendous variety of music and venues. I can be at any of many good venues* within an hour and you can bet we take good advantage of this. And, doing sound for my church (and others) I tend to listen with a critical ear.

    Acoustic does present it's own set of problems and rewards. Not only does what you hear depend on the venue itself, but also where you sit. Although recognizable for what the insturnment is and who is playing it and how, the sound can be quite different from different locations within the same room, not to mention how it changes by simply turning your head..

    Once you've got the basic sounds, timbre, overtones, texture or whatever you want to call the overall sound/feel of the insturnents ingrained in your subconcious, the minute differences that cables might possibly make pale in comparison to the venues and locations therein of a live concert.

    *NJPAC, State Theatre, Count Basie Theater, Community Theater in Morristown, Union County Theater in Rahway, various local churches that put on concerts and several of jazz/blues clubs all within 45 minutes to an hour in Jersey alone. I can be in NY in 25 minutes by train. The options there are limitless. Most recent was the Irridium and BB King's on 42nd st.
    Last edited by markw; 02-25-2005 at 01:27 PM. Reason: Two venues? Not what I had intended to say - clarified

  6. #6
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    162
    Quote Originally Posted by Mash
    Re markw's comments
    Drug trials pose a far higher risk-reward value than any silly audiophile issue. The drug companies DBT use placebos (usually a dummy pill of some type) as a control in part of the test group to distinguish real drug results from results created in the subjects' imaginations. I remember one trial yielded a drug improvement-benefit of 49% in the test group while the placebo group taking the placebo pills achieved a 33% improvement-benefit. This did not seem to be a ringing success for that drug.
    Audio fans should note that if a placebo effect could alter your body's response in a way that mimics a drug, then it seem quite likely that one's expectations could affect one's hearing. Note that not all clinical drug trials use control groups, but all must have at least a single blind (but usually double blind) procedure. If your clinical trial is not blinded, forget about it, your results would not be accepted by the FDA except under extreme extenuating circumstances.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mash
    'What to prefer' can really only be answered by attending a lot of acoustic-instrument recitals so as to lodge the voice (sound) of the real instruments in your acoustic memory- the same way your mother's voice is lodged in your acoustic memory. The specific people playing the instruments need to be competent, but listening to different artists will not pose a problem. You are learning the voice of the real instrument, not the artist.
    Actually "what we prefer" does not even require blinding, but you will never know what is causing the differences you prefer unless you control confounding variables (e.g., with radomization and blinding). What Mash probably means is that we could not establish what is more accurate (a higher goal than "what we prefer") unless we have a live reference and some experience listening to it. The need for a live reference seems to by lost on many audio fans who attempt to compare components with multitracked, mixed-down pop-rock recordings. Using such recordings, alll one could ever establish is "what one prefers". Mash says "what TO prefer" by which, I assume, he thinks we should prefer what is more accurate (or live like). I agree.

  7. #7
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    162
    Quote Originally Posted by musicoverall
    What would be required to prove that two components that measure the same sound different via DBT? How many trials, how many different tests under what conditions, etc etc. How would such a DBT be set up? 30 second snatches of music?

    What are the parameters of a DBT that would prove to one and all that component A and component B sound different? Can anyone outline such a test?
    Let's clarify a few things: If two compoents truely "measured the same", then they MUST sound the same as the measured output determines how they sound (there is no logical alternative). I think you are trying to imply that if they have the same typically reported measurements, they could sound different (becuase the meaurements are incomplete or perhaps the important differences were not measured or reported).

    An ABX device is ideal and you should try to get as close to that arrangement as you can. The listener can swtich and listen to A, B, or X and must guess whether X is the same as A or B. The listener can switch between the three outputs as often as he wants, and listen and switch as long as he want prior to guessing. Without an ABX switch you are unlikely to be able to set up such a nice arrangement. So, you will probably have to have someone simply switch between two components (A and B) and you will have to guess which is playing (= one trial). You probably would listen to A and B a bit before hand to tune your ears and to select musical passages that you think show off possible differences. (If you don't think you can tell A from B when sighted, then perhaps the blinded experiment is unnecessary). The person doing the switching should flip a coin to decide which component to play for each trial. This protocol is single blinded as the person doing the switching knows which is which. Because of this, it would be best if you could not see the person doing the switching, but that may not be possible. If not, ask them to keep a poker face. You should not be able to see them make the switch (or toss the coin) at all (don't look during the switch).

    I have previously told you how to judge how many trials you need to get right to meet standard criteria for statistical significance (a number that has only a 5% probably of occuring by chance). You need a means to calculate that, which might be beyond your math skiills, so just make up something that makes sense to you. For example, you might say that you have to get 80% correct to have some evidence that you can tell the components apart. Decide on this percentage BEFORE you do the experiment. If you score well over 50%, but less than your target significance level you might just say your test was "inconclusive". I'd say you failed to show you could tell a difference.

    DO NOT forget to level match the output of the components to within 0.1 dB if you can. If you can't, play a 1 KHz tone on each and try to get the levels so you cannot tell the difference (test to make sure you can't).

    Good luck, let us know the outcome.

  8. #8
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    727
    Quote Originally Posted by RobotCzar
    Let's clarify a few things: If two compoents truely "measured the same", then they MUST sound the same as the measured output determines how they sound (there is no logical alternative). I think you are trying to imply that if they have the same typically reported measurements, they could sound different (becuase the meaurements are incomplete or perhaps the important differences were not measured or reported)..
    Whenever I attempt to delve into something outside of my comfort level of knowledge, I have a tendency to misstate things. What I meant was two things that measure the same but are purported to sound different... etc, etc. And, to be honest, you're right - I AM implying that measurements are incomplete. They'd have to be IF the two cables sounded different, I'm told.

    I'm not going to attempt a double blind test but I am going to try out markw's suggestion, understanding that whatever the outcome, it's nothing for the scientific journals but for my own edification. The two cables will be level matched but how likely is it that two cables would show significant volume differences? And if they do, I'm wondering how I'm going to be able to keep from looking at my preamp's volume control. I suppose I'm barred from raising or lowering the volume anyway during the test? But perhaps I'm making much ado about nothing. BTW, these will be speaker cables and the portion that I can normally see sticking out between the speakers and close to the amps will be covered. Luckily I use monoblock amps and the speaker cable is very short.

    An ABX device... how do you argue against it having some sort of sonic signature of its own or at least being another device in the signal path and therefore wreaking havoc of some kind? I've heard this argument but I don't know if it's valid.

    As for the math part, I'm going to be a bit unorthodox which I'll explain once the results are in. Normally, I'd guess that 11 corrects out of the 13 trials would convince me. I'm using 13 trials which is an odd number (pun intended) simply because I have that many opportunities in a row (days in a row to test) and I'm going to use them all. 12 would make more sense, I suppose, but 13 it is. I'll give my answer after listening for as many hours as possible but one answer per day. This all starts in about one week and I'll have spent two full weeks listening to the two cables sighted to make sure (??) I have a handle on their respective sound. For the record, the cables are my reference Cardas Neutral Reference and common 16 guage zip cord from Radio Shack. Should be a fun test and perhaps informative as well. The results will be in sometime in the latter part of March. I'll keep you all informed.

    Thanks to all for your assistance.

  9. #9
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    727
    Quote Originally Posted by RobotCzar
    Audio fans should note that if a placebo effect could alter your body's response in a way that mimics a drug, then it seem quite likely that one's expectations could affect one's hearing.
    I wouldn't argue against the possibility, but I've experienced components that sounded opposite my expectations. I can recall more than a few times where I've preferred an original version of a preamp to the "new and improved" Mk II version or a less expensive amp to a more expensive one. In all of those cases, my expectations were the opposite of my experiences. I enjoy certain visual aspects of my gear and my new cables are boring in the looks department. They aren't particularly large and the color is dull. My point is that certainly I could have had a bias of some kind but I can't for the life of me imagine what it could have been. And I've thought about it and those kinds of things since I've been hovering around this board. Your POV isn't being ignored at all so don't think you're wasting your time posting. Truth to tell, I've appreciated hearing the other side, even when I don't agree.

  10. #10
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    538
    Mr. MoA
    Some folk here seemed to have missed Mr. Russell's points about the need to select wire size based on the particular speaker's impedance and the necessary wire length to be used. He had tested some 'light' wire to prove his point. So before you start your test you would do well to review Mr. Russell's comments. 16AWG is a bit light, but you did write that the wires are 'short'. You can also use a DMM to measure and compare the different wires.

    And again, there ARE some speaker wire DBT documented on this site:
    http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm

  11. #11
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    162
    Quote Originally Posted by musicoverall
    The two cables will be level matched but how likely is it that two cables would show significant volume differences? And if they do, I'm wondering how I'm going to be able to keep from looking at my preamp's volume control. I suppose I'm barred from raising or lowering the volume anyway during the test? But perhaps I'm making much ado about nothing.

    An ABX device... how do you argue against it having some sort of sonic signature of its own or at least being another device in the signal path and therefore wreaking havoc of some kind? I've heard this argument but I don't know if it's valid.
    Yes, the ABX is a factor itself. Such devices tend to use high cables and switches becasue of this "problem", but I guess you would have to convince yourself you can't hear the switch before you could use it to test other things. Note that this one arguement against audible cable differences as your system consists of lots of internal cable, particularly speakers which contain very long runs of very thin wire in the voice coils. So, if I have a mile of very thin cable in my speaker, what difference can 15 feet of external speark cable make?

    So, check your cable by hand as you intend. I'd say it is a must that you have someone else adjust the volume (you could mark two locations on your preamp). As for difference in level, differing lengths and different thicknesses have different impedances and therefore different volumes will result. Differences in volume are not differences in quality which is what we are trying to find. It is kind of interesting that you do not expect volume differences from cable (which we can clearly hear and are very sensitive to), but you suspect there are quality differences (which are very hard to detect at the measured distortion levels of home audio components).

    Just to respond to the other point regarding the effect of expectations on results. The effect of expectation is strongest when the true differences are very small. So, very small differences are exactly the ones that can be misleading. If two components have clear audible differences, your choice can easily go against expectations. Human perception is very subjective and interpretive (that is handy if you are trying to make sense of the world). Our brains control what we percieve, not the other way around. This is a very basic and long-established principle that is simply ignored in subjective listening tests.

  12. #12
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    83
    Quote Originally Posted by musicoverall
    Whenever I attempt to delve into something outside of my comfort level of knowledge, I have a tendency to misstate things. What I meant was two things that measure the same but are purported to sound different... etc, etc. And, to be honest, you're right - I AM implying that measurements are incomplete. They'd have to be IF the two cables sounded different, I'm told.

    I'm not going to attempt a double blind test but I am going to try out markw's suggestion, understanding that whatever the outcome, it's nothing for the scientific journals but for my own edification. The two cables will be level matched but how likely is it that two cables would show significant volume differences? And if they do, I'm wondering how I'm going to be able to keep from looking at my preamp's volume control. I suppose I'm barred from raising or lowering the volume anyway during the test? But perhaps I'm making much ado about nothing. BTW, these will be speaker cables and the portion that I can normally see sticking out between the speakers and close to the amps will be covered. Luckily I use monoblock amps and the speaker cable is very short.

    An ABX device... how do you argue against it having some sort of sonic signature of its own or at least being another device in the signal path and therefore wreaking havoc of some kind? I've heard this argument but I don't know if it's valid.

    As for the math part, I'm going to be a bit unorthodox which I'll explain once the results are in. Normally, I'd guess that 11 corrects out of the 13 trials would convince me. I'm using 13 trials which is an odd number (pun intended) simply because I have that many opportunities in a row (days in a row to test) and I'm going to use them all. 12 would make more sense, I suppose, but 13 it is. I'll give my answer after listening for as many hours as possible but one answer per day. This all starts in about one week and I'll have spent two full weeks listening to the two cables sighted to make sure (??) I have a handle on their respective sound. For the record, the cables are my reference Cardas Neutral Reference and common 16 guage zip cord from Radio Shack. Should be a fun test and perhaps informative as well. The results will be in sometime in the latter part of March. I'll keep you all informed.

    Thanks to all for your assistance.
    According to the Cardas web site, Cardas Neutral Reference speaker cable is 8.5 gauge. If cable length and gauge affect the volume of sound, level matching is necessary if you plan to use 16 gauge zip cord for comparison. In addition to the level matching methods already suggested, you might consider just starting each test day with the volume at zero and turning it up to what is comfortable for you without looking at the marks on the volume dial.

    I doubt level matching would be an issue if you are able to find something similar to an 8.5 gauge zip cord. Home Depot is a source of inexpensive cable of various types and gauges. Cables may be sold by the foot, making it easy for you to match the length of your Cardas cables.

    Since an ABX comparator box is not necessary with your method of testing, you don't have to worry about the box itself affecting the sound. However, your method may have disadvantages compared to an ABX test. I mentioned in a previous post the possibilty of mood changes over the 13-day test period affecting your performance, which should be less of a factor in a ABX test finished in a few hours. Another disadvantage has to do with memory. In an ABX test, if my understanding is correct, you can instantly compare A and B for reference anytime you wish. With your method, you will not be able to refresh your memory with a quick reference.

    As has been mentioned by others, you should do the test only if you feel certain you can hear a difference in the two cables. To me "certain" would mean you can describe the differences in some detail. For example, "her voice has an edge in a specifict part of a song on one cable but not the other" or "his words are clear in a specific part of a song on one cable but not the other."

  13. #13
    Suspended markw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Noo Joisey. Youse got a problem wit dat?
    Posts
    4,659

    Perhaps I misunderstood your statement or I missed this part.

    Quote Originally Posted by mystic
    As has been mentioned by others, you should do the test only if you feel certain you can hear a difference in the two cables. To me "certain" would mean you can describe the differences in some detail. For example, "her voice has an edge in a specifict part of a song on one cable but not the other" or "his words are clear in a specific part of a song on one cable but not the other."
    I would assume that MoA wouldn't attempt to compare two cables when he could not identify them in a sighted test.

    But, in any case, to withhold selection on any day because no differences could be heard this would invalidate the test. If the objective is to "prove" to onesself that differences are real and substantial, to avoid selecting either/or should be counted as a miss. What you are suggesting is akin to starting out with a 2 out of 3 situation. Well, sincethat didn't work out, let's make it 3 out of 5. Oh well, let's go for 5 out of 9... ad infinitium.

    No, the object is to see how accurately one can truly "hear" differences.

    To avoid selecting is to admit to oneself that they cannot hear a difference. If this happens several times, it would simply prove the differences are too small to hear with any certainty and that they truly exist. Test over.

    Make a best guess selection each day. At least there's a 50/50 chance it will be correct.

  14. #14
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    727
    Quote Originally Posted by markw
    I would assume that MoA wouldn't attempt to compare two cables when he could not identify them in a sighted test..
    Assumption correct!

  15. #15
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    83
    Quote Originally Posted by markw
    I would assume that MoA wouldn't attempt to compare two cables when he could not identify them in a sighted test.

    But, in any case, to withhold selection on any day because no differences could be heard this would invalidate the test. If the objective is to "prove" to onesself that differences are real and substantial, to avoid selecting either/or should be counted as a miss. What you are suggesting is akin to starting out with a 2 out of 3 situation. Well, sincethat didn't work out, let's make it 3 out of 5. Oh well, let's go for 5 out of 9... ad infinitium.

    No, the object is to see how accurately one can truly "hear" differences.

    To avoid selecting is to admit to oneself that they cannot hear a difference. If this happens several times, it would simply prove the differences are too small to hear with any certainty and that they truly exist. Test over.

    Make a best guess selection each day. At least there's a 50/50 chance it will be correct.
    I did not mean the subject should withhold selection on any day because no difference could be heard on that day. I mean he should be certain he can hear differences before starting his 13-day test. I tried to explain what I meant by "certain" with two examples describing differences. I would expect a listener who can describe the claimed differences to do better in a test than one who cannot. If MoA has described the differences he claims to hear I apologize for overlooking this information.
    Last edited by mystic; 02-26-2005 at 04:20 PM.

  16. #16
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    727
    Quote Originally Posted by mystic
    As has been mentioned by others, you should do the test only if you feel certain you can hear a difference in the two cables. To me "certain" would mean you can describe the differences in some detail. For example, "her voice has an edge in a specifict part of a song on one cable but not the other" or "his words are clear in a specific part of a song on one cable but not the other."
    Yes. I'm pretty certain already of the sonic signatures of each although it's not as simple as your examples. To date I have never heard a cable make any difference in the sound of a human voice, with the exception of a slight, very slight forwardness or recession. Definitely not worth obsessing over. More on that when I've finished.

    Further point - I'm using a jazz piano trio disc and a classical orchestra disc, about one half hour of both each night. No way am I going to just listen to the same discs all night long each night. I figure if it's only apparent on two discs, the differences aren't worth it. I'm playing two different but well recorded discs first each night to relax and finishing with the test discs. I'll make my decision when I stop listening for the night.

  17. #17
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    83
    Quote Originally Posted by musicoverall
    Yes. I'm pretty certain already of the sonic signatures of each although it's not as simple as your examples. To date I have never heard a cable make any difference in the sound of a human voice, with the exception of a slight, very slight forwardness or recession. Definitely not worth obsessing over. More on that when I've finished.

    Further point - I'm using a jazz piano trio disc and a classical orchestra disc, about one half hour of both each night. No way am I going to just listen to the same discs all night long each night. I figure if it's only apparent on two discs, the differences aren't worth it. I'm playing two different but well recorded discs first each night to relax and finishing with the test discs. I'll make my decision when I stop listening for the night.
    GOOD!

  18. #18
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    51
    Musicoverall,

    I'm politely asking what possible help knowing the appearance, provenance, and price of cables you are listening to would be in discovering anything about their sound. I would think you would be excited, thrilled, curious about your own perceptions, and constantly challenging your own assumptions.

    You and I intersect in the love of music itself, and the bountiful human energy that is transformed into something akin to a drug with no apparent side effects, able to give pleasure with no hangover (assuming one does not play really loud).

    Personally, I have done OTHER types of testing in a more or less subjective environment. In this case, it was identical woofers from the same manufacturing batch, in identical enclosures, undergoing the same processing, but being driven by two different amplifier topologies. The audible differences were striking. But some of my other tests nag me, in the sense that I KNEW what I was listening for, and bias confirmation is a powerful misdirector of judgement.

    I'd like to hear from you some of your private misgivings about some of your confident statements. Sometimes hunches and intuition are right on the money. Other times... reexamination confers different results.
    “The only thing to be Patriotic about is the Truth.”
    MAS

  19. #19
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    727
    Quote Originally Posted by Toga
    I'm politely asking what possible help knowing the appearance, provenance, and price of cables you are listening to would be in discovering anything about their sound. I would think you would be excited, thrilled, curious about your own perceptions, and constantly challenging your own assumptions. .
    I don't recall ever saying that appearance, provenance or price made any difference. In fact, my experience is just the opposite in many cases.

    As for my assumptions, if they're not based on experience, I agree they should be challenged and I do so when possible and necessary or at least when it might prove interesting. If I base something on experience, I usually trust those experiences. In this case, I'm doing this experiment because of something Monstrous Mike posted. He wrote that once we understand and can measure how different cables can sound different, we can then use that information to design better cables. I'm simply doing my part to promote scientific study.

    Ok, to be honest, nothing I do or test is going to do anything for science. So another motivator is that I find it hard to believe that there is a group of people that believe that all cables or amps sound essentially the same or at least, can't be discerned in normal use. With so many seemingly intelligent people believing that way, it's hard to simply laugh it off because my beliefs differ. So I'm going into this experiment with an open mind. I don't think it will solve anything for anybody but it might result in a need for further testing ... for me, at least!

  20. #20
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    51
    Bravo, Dude

    It is precisely with this attitude in reverse that I question cable believers, because I do not wish to MISS THE TRUTH if it is out there, simply to live in the comfort I am right.

    Recently I read a post that clarified the "same sound of wire" issue. In it, there was a comparison between skinny zip cord and bulky high-end fare. As soon as you push the series impedance above the noticeable threshold of damping factor on an amplifier, then audible results in the form of frequency vs. speaker impedance will show up. These are MEASURABLE differences. The part where I get torqued is in the materials issue, or whether cables are "made with love" or not. More metal on an RCA jack, vivid neon green jackets, or that silly nylon mesh so many put on speaker wire or interconnects so it is abrasion resistant for engine compartment use (sitting quietly in the safety of a sound room).

    I'm starting to think I'm simply going to have to make and sell a line of high quality cables. Made from conventional materials to prove the point that speaker/signal cables can be black, lack exotic materials, and yet simply with attention to detail and quality construction they will be sufficient to convey every musical nuance. Let me know if you want a free pair MoA.

    “The only thing to be Patriotic about is the Truth.”
    MAS

  21. #21
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    162
    Quote Originally Posted by Toga
    Bravo, Dude

    It is precisely with this attitude in reverse that I question cable believers, because I do not wish to MISS THE TRUTH if it is out there, simply to live in the comfort I am right.

    Recently I read a post that clarified the "same sound of wire" issue. In it, there was a comparison between skinny zip cord and bulky high-end fare. As soon as you push the series impedance above the noticeable threshold of damping factor on an amplifier, then audible results in the form of frequency vs. speaker impedance will show up. These are MEASURABLE differences. The part where I get torqued is in the materials issue, or whether cables are "made with love" or not. More metal on an RCA jack, vivid neon green jackets, or that silly nylon mesh so many put on speaker wire or interconnects so it is abrasion resistant for engine compartment use (sitting quietly in the safety of a sound room).

    I'm starting to think I'm simply going to have to make and sell a line of high quality cables. Made from conventional materials to prove the point that speaker/signal cables can be black, lack exotic materials, and yet simply with attention to detail and quality construction they will be sufficient to convey every musical nuance. Let me know if you want a free pair MoA.

    No offense, but I'd pass on that offer, MoA. I have some reservations about Toga's comments. In some cases, I agree with what he says, but in other cases I find his logic needs work. For example, two cables identical in all respects but length will have measureable differences. Measurable differences are not the point, audible differences are. So, while I agree that measured performance matters (what else could matter?) and that measured differences among cables is laughably small, I think he is missing the point a bit. There is no evidence that "attention to detail" or "quality construction" results in audible (or even measurable) differences (or, if you prefer "convey every muscial nuance"--what are the units used to measure that? Nuounces?). We already have cables that convey electrical signals so well that we cannot detect differences in electrical nuance, they are called zip cord. No need for black cables with attention to detail.

    Sorry for the saracsm. Bad day, I guess.

  22. #22
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    51
    Haha Czar-boy, I was making a verbal contrast to flashier cable designs, not purporting anything about a black cable that wouldnt be true about a clear one.

    I don't mind a little arm wrestling with you on our opinions, but try and qwell the personal attacks (its hard to do) simply because we don't agree. I find things in your posts I agree with as well.

    As for attention to detail and good workmanship, that is the LEAST one could expect for high buck cables. Longevity of service in the face of overmolded rubber plugs selling for just under $100 that can't be serviced when the inevitable accident occurs? No direct audible effect may come from a good solder joint or non-nicked cable strands, but it should still be in a cable for other product quality issues besides sonics.

    It seems a creative mind will find loopholes even in seemingly innocuous statements; examples like "if we have an inch and a mile of cable, the effect on the signal will be different" are a stretch and you know it.

    "Doahp" says Homer.

    Lets say instead, that we have a 3ft cable and a 4ft cable. Audibly different? And yeah similar means the SAME for all practical intents and purposes, although not identical.

    Teehee, someone might have gotten out of bed wrong this morning! :P
    “The only thing to be Patriotic about is the Truth.”
    MAS

  23. #23
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    727
    [QUOTE=Toga Let me know if you want a free pair MoA.[/QUOTE]

    I never turn down anything for free!

    To tell the truth, until recently, I was never aware that there was such a division of the subjectivist and objectivist camps. What I heard was that cables can't make a difference and I'm saying to myself "who are those crazies? I hear a difference!" and I never heard a really credible line of reasoning from the objectivists - didn't know any! I grew up and have remained scientifically challenged... "It doesn't show", says Robot Czar, nervously checking his watch while simultaneously running a sweaty finger under his shirt collar. Yeah, it's true, RC. It's time I came out of the closet! LOL! At any rate, Music has always been my "thing" and anything that made the music sound better worked for me.

    But there is too much information contrary to cable sonics to simply ignore. Mind you, I'm convinced that I'll pass this listening test with flying colors but I've been wrong before.

  24. #24
    Suspended markw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Noo Joisey. Youse got a problem wit dat?
    Posts
    4,659
    Quote Originally Posted by musicoverall
    Mind you, I'm convinced that I'll pass this listening test with flying colors but I've been wrong before.
    I, too, have no doubt you'll be able to pass either. Remember what I said sometime ago about similar gauge, length and construction. I believe others have aluded to this also.

  25. #25
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    727
    Quote Originally Posted by markw
    I, too, have no doubt you'll be able to pass either. Remember what I said sometime ago about similar gauge, length and construction. I believe others have aluded to this also.
    Ah... I'm trying to. Didn't you say that a higher guage number might make the sound quieter? The cables will be crudely level matched. I'm taking Mystic's suggestion to set the volume at zero to start the test and then I'm going to hold my finger down on the remote volume until it sounds loud enough. I'm not even going to count the clicks.

    Length will be the same for both - 1m.

    I don't recall what you said about construction.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Sighted Testing IS King!! Silly me - all those years wasted...
    By magictooth in forum The Audio Lab, Tweaks, Mods, DIY
    Replies: 95
    Last Post: 02-11-2005, 02:47 PM
  2. bi-wiring
    By sleeper_red in forum Cables
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 12-19-2004, 02:47 PM
  3. Which Amp
    By CannondaleSuperVee in forum Amps/Preamps
    Replies: 83
    Last Post: 08-11-2004, 04:32 PM
  4. Null Hypothesis
    By RobotCzar in forum Cables
    Replies: 127
    Last Post: 05-31-2004, 06:14 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •