Can we categorize exotic cables as luxury rather than necessity?

[Monstrous Mike]

No Sir. He is asking the only right question in response to your condescending statement to him about how much he still needs to learn after 30 years.

You seem to imply that thirty years experience in this hobby means something a lot more than it does. This is not like a job where you work on it for hours each day, take courses and professional development, attend seminars, have tutors and peers, etc. If we take your ridiculous stance then perhaps I could give you some dental advice since I have 45 years of experience brushing my teeth. What nonsense.

Either play fair or don't play.

Oh Grand Puba of Audio Board Moderation, please let us in on the sacrosanct guidelines for fair play that you have drafted and we all shall follow.

[rb122]

You are asking the wrong question. It matters not how many DBT has null results where the hypothesis is accepted. What matters is demonstration for differences, on any system, esp[ecially one that would pass muster with all the golden ears as some will find faults with any system, excuses, really, not fact based.
So, you should be asking for the revealing system demonstrating those differences they think are there. Yep, nowhere around. Why?

Perhaps, and I'm just saying perhaps, all the "golden ears" with the grand systems feel secure enough in their listening protocol not to worry about performing DBT's on cables.

Further, why would one repeatedly test cables on systems that even the most staunch audiophile would likely say won't reveal differences in cable sound? If they are in fact testing them on "audiophile approved" gear, why don't they report this?

It's the scientist "naysayers" (I hate that word) that are demanding proof in the form of DBT. It is these same folks that actually perform these tests. But as far as we know, these tests are akin to testing low bass response on a tiny Bose Acoustimass satellite - bad analogy, probably! But you get the drift.

I agree that what matters is proof of a positive experience and there are none that we know of. However compelling the lack of such evidence is, the lack of seemingly appropriate testing protocol won't help to sway anyone to the objectivist side, IMHO.

[pctower]

You seem to imply that thirty years experience in this hobby means something a lot more than it does. This is not like a job where you work on it for hours each day, take courses and professional development, attend seminars, have tutors and peers, etc. If we take your ridiculous stance then perhaps I could give you some dental advice since I have 45 years of experience brushing my teeth. What nonsense.


Oh Grand Puba of Audio Board Moderation, please let us in on the sacrosanct guidelines for fair play that you have drafted and we all shall follow.

Mtry is the one who brought up experience. I'm simply asking him to play fair. If you want to talk to someone about the inferences to be drawn from 30 years of experience, talk to mtry. He implied in a very condescending way that E-stat had much to learn.

And you wholly failed to respond to my comments about the distinction between advising that something is "unproven" and the unqualified type of advice mtry (and many others here) give about the lack of audible differences between cables.

Grand Puba? You see there's one critical difference between me and most others on this board. I have been entirely open as to my identity and my background. People can assess what I say by reference to my experience, knowledge or lack of same.

Unfortunately, that can be said of very few who post on this board. You are one of the few exceptions.

[Monstrous Mike]

I have been entirely open as to my identity and my background. People can assess what I say by reference to my experience, knowledge or lack of same.

Does this really matter? I too have been open about my background but as I have stated in the past, I honestly believe that Albert Einstein could come back from the dead, write a new theory of cable relativity and people here would say: "Yeah, but has he ever designed an audio amp?".

And then when you get a guy who has designed an audio amp and poo-poos the idea of power cords (ie. Bryston), then their amps are suddenly crap and don't have the resolving power, etc., etc.

It's a never-ending cycle. The belief is so firmly entrenched there is no room for change. Now that is really quite sad. I actually admire Richard Greene for having the balls to participate in a DBT and be clearly shown that what he believed about cables was no true. But since that runs contrary to the popular cable myth his experience is dismissed out of hand. Doesn't follow the belief pattern.

What is at play here is called "Confirmation Bias". It is extremely powerful and hard to overcome. Read about it, it's really quite interesting.

If anything good comes from all of this rather useless debate, it might be that we learn a little more about ourselves, grow and little and become a little wiser.

[pctower]

Does this really matter? I too have been open about my background but as I have stated in the past, I honestly believe that Albert Einstein could come back from the dead, write a new theory of cable relativity and people here would say: "Yeah, but has he ever designed an audio amp?".

And then when you get a guy who has designed an audio amp and poo-poos the idea of power cords (ie. Bryston), then their amps are suddenly crap and don't have the resolving power, etc., etc.

It's a never-ending cycle. The belief is so firmly entrenched there is no room for change. Now that is really quite sad. I actually admire Richard Greene for having the balls to participate in a DBT and be clearly shown that what he believed about cables was no true. But since that runs contrary to the popular cable myth his experience is dismissed out of hand. Doesn't follow the belief pattern.

What is at play here is called "Confirmation Bias". It is extremely powerful and hard to overcome. Read about it, it's really quite interesting.

If anything good comes from all of this rather useless debate, it might be that we learn a little more about ourselves, grow and little and become a little wiser.

What did Richard believe that he now will state is not true?

I know about confirmation bias. I have never disputed the need to remove bias in blind testing.

Moreover, experience is not necessary if one is simply going to parrot sloppy test results and claim they mean something - it sure would help however. It would particularly help those who may be lead to believe their is more value to the citing of those test results that is actually there.

You're the man of science. I'm surprised you don't demand that proper protocol and statistical analysis be followed, rather than accepting test results simply because of your own "Confirmation Bias".

In any event, when one goes beyond reporting these test results and draws firm conclusions and inflicts those conclusions, without any qualification at all, on newcomers, then I think his background and experience becomes important. He has drawn firm conclusions from irreliable data drawn from a painfully small number of amateur tests and derived absolute dogma therefrom. I submit he has provided no basis for one to conclude that he is capable of doing anything other than posting lists of articles from the popular press (that is, as I said, the mainly now-defunct Julian Hirsch type press).

As for Bryston, if is often discussed that their power supplies seem to be immune from deriving any benefit from special power cords. I certainly don't know, because I have only heard one Bryston piece - a preamp I tried for a week many years ago and returned because of its harsh, brittle sound - but I don't see Bryston generally trashed. As far as I can tell it's a well respected name in high end circles. You seem to have an intense need to make everyone who makes decisions that are at odds with your approach to life wrong and stupid, and therefore you create this sweeping general descriptions of the people you think are stupid, and generally I believe your generalizations are way off base.

[E-Stat]

I actually admire Richard Greene for having the balls to participate in a DBT...

But apparently does not have the balls to answer questions raised by myself and others as to the particulars of that test. What is there to hide?

rw

[Monstrous Mike]

It's a never-ending cycle.

Summary:

There is no valid evidence of cable sonics. There, cycle over until somebody comes up with something credible.

[Tony_Montana]

NBS has a chart on thier site. If You have "X" dollars in a system, the cables MUST cost "X" amount. I mean something to the tune of, If your system costs $25k you MUST spend $5k+ on cables...and it gets worse.

That notion must be the one of dumbest audio myth that is floating around. It make cable issue black&white, with no gray area between-which is really sad

Tony, can you be more specific about what you mean by "expensive or exotic cables?"

Except for special case such as long runs or noisy environment, if a cable maker goes beyond cable's specification and add things that don't effect the sonic quality of cable and charge for it, then I would call that expensive or exotic.

Indeed, most folks are simply content driving their Buicks and Saturns. So it is with cables.

Well, lets look at this way:If speed limit on the freeway is 65 mph, then it doesn't matter if you are driving a Pinto (which I used to own ) or a Nascar. You can not go over 65 mph.

The same logic can be applied to cables. If Physics dictate how electrons move from point A to point B, then it doesn't matter if you have $1000 cable or $10 one. Both have to obey law of Physics no matter how much money one throw at it.

People spend all this money on these Boutique cables to carry a signal that eventually runs into good ol' standard speaker wire once the signal passes the terminals on the back of their speakers. How does that make sense?

It doesn't. If you ever open up a speaker, you will see the thinnest speaker wires (which probably cost 0.1 cent a foot) going from terminal to speakers which will make audiophiles cry murder

So either answer his question or publicly retract that statement and apologize to him and don't attack others for matters you are not willing to reveal about yourself.

Mtry apologizing?? Now you are asking for impossibility

[JSE]

It doesn't. If you ever open up a speaker, you will see the thinnest speaker wires (which probably cost 0.1 cent a foot) going from terminal to speakers which will make audiophiles cry murder

Then why the argument about expensive cables? The wiring in your amp is "cheap" then you put expensive cables from your receiver to your speakers or other components and then once there, you have "cheap" wires again up to your drivers. Your starting with cheap wire and ending with cheap wire. What the hell difference does it make what you have in between? To me, the whole argument about expensive cables is moot, unless you do some custom wiring in your speakers or components. Am I just clueless or do I have a point? If their is a difference is sound because of cables then why don't we see a expensive binding post craze or expensive internal wiring craze?

JSE

[E-Stat]

Well, lets look at this way:If speed limit on the freeway is 65 mph, then it doesn't matter if you are driving a Pinto (which I used to own ) or a Nascar. You can not go over 65 mph...The same logic can be applied to cables.

I like your post because I think it really sheds some light as to how differently we approach the topic. Like your analogy, the cable detractors look in terms of simplistic one-dimensional criteria. A car needs to go, but it also needs to drive around corners, and brake. Rather than using a crude stock car as the comparison, lets use something closer, and in some ways, better. A Honda S2000 for example will drive 65 mph around corners that would roll over the Pinto. Even at lower speeds, cornering in a Pinto and encountering a bump will force it's simplistic live axle rear end to jump, lose traction, and require correction. A Honda S2000's independent suspension would be largely unaffected by such. A Honda S2000 is capable of panic braking in substantially less distance than a Pinto. There is also a vast difference in how much time it takes for these two vehicles to reach 65 mph.

The real worlds of driving and music listening are more complex than you suggest.

rw

[E-Stat]

Then why the argument about expensive cables?

You have a valid point when you limit the discussion to receivers and speakers with "cheap wire" as you put it not to mention other cheap parts as well. Although the sins are cumulative, there is little to gain when there is little to begin with. The scenario is different, however, for when those "cheap wire" assumptions are not true.

rw

[okiemax]

Tony, thanks for responding to my request regarding what you mean by "expensive or exotic cables."

You replied: "Except for special case such as long runs or noisy environment, if a cable maker goes beyond cable's specification and add things that don't effect the sonic quality of cable and charge for it, then I would call that expensive or exotic."

While this is an interesting definition, I don't believe it can be easily used to label each cable on the market as either expensive or inexpensive. I think you understand my point without me listing scores of different cable models and asking you to identify the expensive and inexpensive ones. I was hoping instead for "expensive" defined in terms of dollars.

[JSE]

You have a valid point when you limit the discussion to receivers and speakers with "cheap wire" as you put it not to mention other cheap parts as well. Although the sins are cumulative, there is little to gain when there is little to begin with. The scenario is different, however, for when those "cheap wire" assumptions are not true.

rw

Thanks for the reply. I guess what I am trying to say. Why put $500, $1000, or even $3000 cables or speaker cables on speakers and components that don't have the same "quality" on the inside? I have seen the inside of Vandersteen speakers as well as higher end paradigm speakes. Looks like generic wire to me. Granted some would think these are low end, but the same argument exist. Why put $500 cables on these speakers? Does not make sense.


JSE

[DMK]

So, you should be asking for the revealing system demonstrating those differences they think are there. Yep, nowhere around. Why?

Because DBT's using a "revealing" system may not have ever been performed. That's the problem E-Stat and PCTower have - these tests don't cite the equipment used in the test. If all these DBT's are done with cheap receivers and cheap bookshelf speakers, they won't satisfy the audiophile wisdom. Of course, then we get into another debate as to what constitues a "revealing" system. Didn't Monstrous Mike say in this thread that the debate will never end?

[Rockwell]

Because DBT's using a "revealing" system may not have ever been performed. That's the problem E-Stat and PCTower have - these tests don't cite the equipment used in the test. If all these DBT's are done with cheap receivers and cheap bookshelf speakers, they won't satisfy the audiophile wisdom. Of course, then we get into another debate as to what constitues a "revealing" system. Didn't Monstrous Mike say in this thread that the debate will never end?

"Revealing system" is undefined, as is the term "audiophile wisdom."

[mtrycraft]

He implied in a very condescending way that E-stat had much to learn.
.

Are you implying he has nothing more to learn in audio? That his experience gives him immunity from biase? From audio hype, bs, mythology, voodoo?
I have run into those so called experts with a lot of experience, teaching , and to find out that they should have chosen a different endevor as their experience was lacking in real knowledge, real know how, real thinking and evaluating.
Yes, life is full of tricks.

[mtrycraft]

I honestly believe that Albert Einstein could come back from the dead, write a new theory of cable relativity and people here would say: "Yeah, but has he ever designed an audio amp?"..

Or worse, imply what would he know as he is not an audiophile.

[mtrycraft]

But apparently does not have the balls to answer questions raised by myself and others as to the particulars of that test. What is there to hide?

rw

Your turn to demonstrate audible differences. Burden of proof. How about it?

[skeptic]

Your mistake is that you assume that audiophiles make their decisions on how to spend their money on a rational basis. This is clearly not the case or there wouldn't even be an audio cable industry unless and until they not only proved that their product sounds different but that is sounds better and worth the price. The fact that it appears to be thriving without that only goes to show how many people have money burning a hole in their pocket and are too eager to give it to anyone who can make them feel better. I only wish I had gotten in on this racket myself a long time ago.

[E-Stat]

Your turn to demonstrate audible differences. Burden of proof. How about it?

Yesterday I made flight arrangements to meet my friends JWC and HP up at Seacliff next month. Naturally, I'm excited to get another intense exposure to the very real world of high end audio. I'll ask Harry if he's ever tried swapping out the Valhalla for zip !

If only you could hear that system, you'd know.

rw

[Monstrous Mike]

Because DBT's using a "revealing" system may not have ever been performed. That's the problem E-Stat and PCTower have - these tests don't cite the equipment used in the test. If all these DBT's are done with cheap receivers and cheap bookshelf speakers, they won't satisfy the audiophile wisdom. Of course, then we get into another debate as to what constitues a "revealing" system. Didn't Monstrous Mike say in this thread that the debate will never end?

We have "revealing" systems and we have a method of using them to test wires. So what is the problem? If I was a yeasayer, I would use that and do something to shut Mtrycrafts up instead of always arguing with him.

Simply put, cable sonics are not supported by any credible evidence. Until that happens, Mtrycrafts and guys like him will always win any rational arguements regarding this subject.

[woodman]

"Revealing system" is undefined, as is a the term "audiophile wisdom."

In my experience (which covers a whole bunch of years), the term "audiophile wisdom" is nothing more than an oxymoron - much like "The Moral Majority" (which was neither one) of some years back. This is why I decided back in the 1970s to turn in my membership card, secret decoder ring, etc. and resign from the Audiophile Society once and for all. I considered myself an "audiophile" since long before the term was ever coined (back in the late 1930s), but I saw with dismay just where my fellow audio nuts were headed and I wanted no part of it. Today, I don't want anyone to call me an audiophile ... it's become a negative term to me.

[pctower]

In my experience (which covers a whole bunch of years), the term "audiophile wisdom" is nothing more than an oxymoron - much like "The Moral Majority" (which was neither one) of some years back. This is why I decided back in the 1970s to turn in my membership card, secret decoder ring, etc. and resign from the Audiophile Society once and for all. I considered myself an "audiophile" since long before the term was ever coined (back in the late 1930s), but I saw with dismay just where my fellow audio nuts were headed and I wanted no part of it. Today, I don't want anyone to call me an audiophile ... it's become a negative term to me.

Which I assumes means that you have not listened to a system above the BestBuy/CircuitCity level since sometime in the 1970s.

[woodman]

Which I assumes means that you have not listened to a system above the BestBuy/CircuitCity level since sometime in the 1970s.

Now there's a nonsensically snotty statement if there ever was one ... not fitting for a man of your purported sophistication, Phil. Sounds like something that Jon Risch might come up with. You ought to be ashamed of yourself.

FYI ... over the course of my life, I've listened to nearly everything ever put on the market - at ALL price levels including those products that carry pricetags that most sane people would consider excessive. I've also serviced audio products from all across the pricing spectrum - from the very cheap to the very expensive. All of which has given me more first-hand knowledge and experience than perhaps any two other members here combined.

[E-Stat]

I've listened to nearly everything ever put on the market - at ALL price levels including those products that carry pricetags that most sane people would consider excessive.

Which combination of components did you favor most?

rw