Amazing how some can tell subtle differences between cables.

[Tony_Montana]

Rather arrogant would you say to pass judgment on everyone else, based on your own personal experiences?

Well, members at CA do it all the time

As Mtry mentioned, rapid switching is very effective way to distinguish subtle changes between cables as it will take memory coloration out of picture. I believe rapid switching is even more reliable than DBT testing (I know Mrty will disagree with that) as in DB testing, memory still does play a part.

I guess then that you have experimented little with speaker placement, listening position, or room treatments, as none offer an instantaneous switching capability.

That is true, but most of the time speaker placement effects are not subtle at all and often dramatic. And one can forecasts what type of effect speaker placement will have on the sound so as to pay close attention to it. For example, when you placed traps around your room, you were paying very close attention to bass notes to see if its effects are improvement or not.

But for cables, not only effects are subtle, but one can not participate ahead of time what type of effects it will have on the sound

[E-Stat]

But for cables, not only effects are subtle, but one can not participate ahead of time what type of effects it will have on the sound

Huh? It works for everyone who can read in either case.

rw

[mtrycraft]

I believe rapid switching is even more reliable than DBT testing (I know Mrty will disagree with that) as in DB testing, memory still does play a part.

But you can do rapid switching under DBT, especially with an ABX box
Test subject will do this on their own without instruction as they discover the advantages of this.


But for cables, not only effects are subtle, but one can not participate ahead of time what type of effects it will have on the sound

If the cables are comparable, 12ga -16ga, it is very predictable, nothing will happen.

[pctower]

Well, members at CA do it all the time

As Mtry mentioned, rapid switching is very effective way to distinguish subtle changes between cables as it will take memory coloration out of picture. I believe rapid switching is even more reliable than DBT testing (I know Mrty will disagree with that) as in DB testing, memory still does play a part.



That is true, but most of the time speaker placement effects are not subtle at all and often dramatic. And one can forecasts what type of effect speaker placement will have on the sound so as to pay close attention to it. For example, when you placed traps around your room, you were paying very close attention to bass notes to see if its effects are improvement or not.

But for cables, not only effects are subtle, but one can not participate ahead of time what type of effects it will have on the sound

Personally, I suspect that a scientifically proper cable DBT has never been reported. Probably one has never even been conducted. Therefore, claims and statements made by both sides are mainly mental masturbation.

E-stat explained in a recent post why cable companies don't bother to conduct scientific DBTs, and no one else seems to care enough to do so.

Audio (as opposed to home entertainment and background music) has always been primarily for those who have a dedicated listening area with two speakers properly placed in relationship to a single sitting position. Audiophiles are those who are passionately interested in music AND good home reproduction, to the point that their approach to electronic home reproduction of music is very much at variance with the general population. Audiophiles are people who sit in front of their two speakers for hours on end the way most other boobs sit in front of TVs. Because of the serious nature of their listening habits, audiophiles are naturally prone to seek improvements in their systems, where most people don't care because their systems are primarily for background music, and hiding all equipment, cables and speakers is the primary deisign consideration for their systems.

The vast majority of audiophiles have always made decisions based on what they perceive to make improvements in their systems that were worth the cost of these improvements. They care about how their own system sounds to them - they don't care about the science or lack of science in back of what they do. Moreover, they make their decisions consistent with the way they listen - sighted and non-scientifically.

If these kind of people didn't exist, there would be no Audio industry and virtually no audiophiles. Companies such as Levinson, Rowland, Krell, Audio Research, MIT, Transparent, Audioquest, Conrad-Johnson, Vandersteen, SoundLab, etc would never have come into existence and this site would not exist if audiophiles took the scientific approach the few stallwarts on this board seem to demand.

Let me make myself perfectly clear. I do not believe anyone on this board or on any audio board has ever really dealt with audio DBTs in a valid, scientific manner. There are difficult statistical issues involved. In addition, the validity of tests is dependent upon the expertise behind the tests. The required expertise is not engineering. Rather it comes more from psychologists. And as far as I can tell there are virtually no people who possess the degree of expertise in the proper disciplines that would be required to set up, hold or opinine on valid blind testing as applied to cables (or for that matter all other components) who ever post on the internet.

[Richard Greene]

Every four to six months in a hot humid climate, or every 8 to 12 months in a dry environment, take apart all your wires and clean the ends of the wires and terminations
and jacks with contact cleaner such as the Caig deoxIT I use (or one of a hundred other brands).

Clean the inside of rarely used controls such as the balance control, bass & treble control every six months for old equipment (over 8-10 years old .. and every year for newer equipment. More often in hot humid areas.

Then tighten all connections (very tight without breaking anything).

You are more likely to hear ... the same improvement you'd hear if you replaced your old corroded wires/loose connections with new clean wires and tight connections. Of course then you'd attribute the change to the new wires.

Or maybe everythibng will sound the same, but at least you will be busy and productive for a while. and far away from this WireNut/WirePolice asylum!

[mtrycraft]

Let me make myself perfectly clear. I do not believe anyone on this board or on any audio board has ever really dealt with audio DBTs in a valid, scientific manner. There are difficult statistical issues involved. In addition, the validity of tests is dependent upon the expertise behind the tests. The required expertise is not engineering. Rather it comes more from psychologists. And as far as I can tell there are virtually no people who possess the degree of expertise in the proper disciplines that would be required to set up, hold or opinine on valid blind testing as applied to cables (or for that matter all other components) who ever post on the internet.

Perhaps you should contact Dr Toole? He know how and what his data is on wires. It comes down to wire basics, R, I, C.

[pctower]

Perhaps you should contact Dr Toole? He know how and what his data is on wires. It comes down to wire basics, R, I, C.

He has to my knowledge never even claimed to have conducted DBTs on cables. If you know otherwise, please enlighten me.

[Monstrous Mike]

He has to my knowledge never even claimed to have conducted DBTs on cables. If you know otherwise, please enlighten me.

I have second hand knowledge that he has conducted DBTs on speaker wires. When he was designing speakers and testing them, he wanted to make sure all of the variables in his DBTs on speakers were controlled and that included the cables. He found that cables did not affect the sound of his speakers.

I cannot verify this story but I have no reason to doubt the person that told me this.

[mtrycraft]

I have second hand knowledge that he has conducted DBTs on speaker wires. When he was designing speakers and testing them, he wanted to make sure all of the variables in his DBTs on speakers were controlled and that included the cables. He found that cables did not affect the sound of his speakers.

I cannot verify this story but I have no reason to doubt the person that told me this.

A number of years ago I corresponded with him on this and a couple of other issues. Your second hand story is factual Cables boiled down to the old standard, R, C, L. nothing more.

[Pat D]

I have second hand knowledge that he has conducted DBTs on speaker wires. When he was designing speakers and testing them, he wanted to make sure all of the variables in his DBTs on speakers were controlled and that included the cables. He found that cables did not affect the sound of his speakers.

I cannot verify this story but I have no reason to doubt the person that told me this.

Alan Lofft, former editor of Audio Scene Canada, told me in an Email that Dr. Toole had done extensive DB testing with cables a number of years ago and found that proper cables did not make an audible difference.

[Monstrous Mike]

Alan Lofft, former editor of Audio Scene Canada, told me in an Email that Dr. Toole had done extensive DB testing with cables a number of years ago and found that proper cables did not make an audible difference.

Thanks, Pat. And I honestly believe that he went into such testing with a completely open mind with his only goal being to determine if he should be using a certain type (i.e. optimal) of speaker wire for his speaker DBT tests.

[mtrycraft]

Alan Lofft, former editor of Audio Scene Canada, told me in an Email that Dr. Toole had done extensive DB testing with cables a number of years ago and found that proper cables did not make an audible difference.

When did you exchange with him? What time period did Toole do this? Was any of it published in that magazine back then?

[mtrycraft]

He has to my knowledge never even claimed to have conducted DBTs on cables. If you know otherwise, please enlighten me.

Email him. Simple. His email is at the web site for Harman.

[Tony_Montana]

If these kind of people [audiophiles] didn't exist, there would be no Audio industry and virtually no audiophiles. Companies such as Levinson, Rowland, Krell, Audio Research, MIT, Transparent, Audioquest, Conrad-Johnson, Vandersteen, SoundLab, etc would never have come into existence and this site would not exist if audiophiles took the scientific approach the few stallwarts on this board seem to demand.

I really don't see what that got to do with cables. Are you saying that any audiophile that don't belive in exotic bales is not an audiophile-even if they owns expensive equipment from companies you mentioned?

There are alot of audiophile or professionals (even on this site such as Terrence or Greene) that do own or worked with expensive components, but do not belive in exotic cables. And they like listen to music as much as next audiophile

[Monstrous Mike]

Audiophiles are people who sit in front of their two speakers for hours on end the way most other boobs sit in front of TVs.

Yikes. Perhaps audiophiles should turn off their systems once and awhile and watch the Discovery Channel and learn something.

The vast majority of audiophiles have always made decisions based on what they perceive to make improvements in their systems that were worth the cost of these improvements. They care about how their own system sounds to them - they don't care about the science or lack of science in back of what they do. Moreover, they make their decisions consistent with the way they listen - sighted and non-scientifically.

People make perception decisions when it comes to art, decorating your home, gettting a haircut, buying wine. Most people do not make perceptions decisions when souping up their car, rebuilding their roof, or buying new hardware for their computer. I think it might be more accurate for you to say that audiophiles do not care if their system sounds the same after a change, only that they perceive an improvement and are thus "happier".

Let me make myself perfectly clear. I do not believe anyone on this board or on any audio board has ever really dealt with audio DBTs in a valid, scientific manner. There are difficult statistical issues involved. In addition, the validity of tests is dependent upon the expertise behind the tests. The required expertise is not engineering. Rather it comes more from psychologists. And as far as I can tell there are virtually no people who possess the degree of expertise in the proper disciplines that would be required to set up, hold or opinine on valid blind testing as applied to cables (or for that matter all other components) who ever post on the internet.

Probably true. But audiophiles do hold the upper hand because their own home listening results trump everything else. Maybe the security of that is the reason they will not let it go. But that would require the psychologist to verify.