-
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtrycraft
He did a lot of measurements, science, and zero listening testing, unless you can show the latter...
Next time read the first sentence. The listening preceeded these tests. When you do, you will understand why he tried to measure that which he and others hear. Amen.
"Recently I've done a collection of measurements and tests on interconnect cables to see what I could find that would explain the sonic differences that many people, including myself, have grown accustomed to hearing."
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtrycraft
He is talking about technical differneces, measurments, applications in certain cases, like mic cables.
I read no such qualification in either his opening comments that framed the research nor in his conclusion:
"To recap: to make cables disappear from the sonic equation, all that is needed is balanced transmission combined with sub-1ohm output impedance line drivers. I would like to propose this as a standard for audiophile equipment makers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtrycraft
He is has no basis for audible differences; he has not conducted any such trials, did he?
You may debate that with him. Since you cited this source, I presented his observations without commentary.
rw
-
Next time read the first sentence. The listening preceeded these tests.
Ah, yes, he did listen as you and may audiophiles have. Unreliable at best, worhtless for sure as it had zero bias controls, at least he has not reported that he used any. We know you have not. So, Those lisneing has no real meaning. End of story.
When you do, you will understand why he tried to measure that which he and others hear. Amen.
Oh, I know why he measured. He wanted to confirm what he thought he heard. As to real listeing, bias controlled, there were none. So, he is chasing ghosts, nothing more.
[b]"Recently I've done a collection of measurements and tests on interconnect cables to see what I could find that would explain the sonic differences that many people, including myself, have grown accustomed to hearing."
Yes, perceptional differences that have no real basis in facts. Ghost chasing.
[b]I read no such qualification in either his opening comments that framed the research nor in his conclusion:
"To recap: to make cables disappear from the sonic equation, all that is needed is balanced transmission combined with sub-1ohm output impedance line drivers. I would like to propose this as a standard for audiophile equipment makers.
You may debate that with him. Since you cited this source, I presented his observations without commentary.
rw
Oh, you presented a sentenca and tried to draw an underlying concusion that is not there.
And precisely what he concludes, to make cables dissappear, he has not listened to see if there needs to be anything further done in the first place.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by okiemax
Gimme a break, mtrycraft! I got the part about mic cables being moved around. Next time I have a mic in my hand I will try to remain motionless. Should I also give up playing jump rope to the music with my speaker cables?
I didn't know silver was used in some mic cables before reading the article. Putzeys refers to the "brightness often attributed to teflon silver cables." I wonder if they are bright only when they are being moved or have recently been moved. I tried some silver interconnects between my CD player and my integrated amp, and I thought they were too bright, so I returned them. Now I'm thinking maybe I moved those cables around too much before installing them, or it could have been that 500 miles bouncing up and down in the back of the UPS truck before arrival.
Putzeys may or may not agree with everything DellaSala said in that epilogue to Putzeys' article. I don't know. I do wonder why DellaSala thought the epilogue was necessary.
You give me a break. Are all the interconnect recommendations being asked for are for mic cable? Any? One such request? No. So it is irrelevant what he has measured in such cables when in such abused conditions when it comes to interconnects between CD and amp, isn't it? And, he found nothing in those interconnects, nothing. End of chapter.
Putzeys didn't include teflon and silver beacuse they are in mic cables but because audiophiles use them in their regular interconnects and report those perceptions. He just extended the range of operations beyond what is encountered in a system and tried to explain away the perceived differences. Does not apply unless in a mic type setup. Does not apply in these discussions as that is not what is being discussed here, no mic cable discussed. So, he really has not explained away perceived differences as he has yet to demonstrate those audible differeences in standard interconnect usages just accepted reports as being factual. Yet, it appears, people extrapolate that mic cable measurements to ordinary interconnects. Does not apply.
But what do I know?
-
Pmji
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monstrous Mike
I fully believe that you cannot have an objective discussion on this topic. You may accuse the same of me but I really have no interest in the final outcome of this debate one way or the other. If it turns out that the exotic cable compnaies have been right all along with their unique cable designs then I may or may not explore getting new cables for my system.
On the other hand, if it turns out that a basic cable is all you really need and no amount of handwaving will actually improve system sound, then a lot of people like you will be left scratching their heads wondering that the hell they were hearing in the first place.
Perhaps the spectre of that possibility keeps you steadfastly anchored in your belief about cable sonics, no matter what is discussed.
I remain fully open to the possiblity of cable sonics and if and when somebody shows that they actually make a difference, I will be first in line to find a scientific explanation. And ironically, this sort of investigation should lead to even better cables.
Are open to cable sonics being myth? It sure doesn't sound like it.
I'd say that rb can and has been objective, particularly in light of your post where you believe that rb is a believer in cable sonics. He's posted the opposite many times on this board. As I recall, he's a disbeliever but is open to the possibility that some cables might sound different but doesn't particularly care. He's sorta like YOU! :)
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtrycraft
You give me a break. Are all the interconnect recommendations being asked for are for mic cable? Any? One such request? No. So it is irrelevant what he has measured in such cables when in such abused conditions when it comes to interconnects between CD and amp, isn't it? And, he found nothing in those interconnects, nothing. End of chapter.
Putzeys didn't include teflon and silver beacuse they are in mic cables but because audiophiles use them in their regular interconnects and report those perceptions. He just extended the range of operations beyond what is encountered in a system and tried to explain away the perceived differences. Does not apply unless in a mic type setup. Does not apply in these discussions as that is not what is being discussed here, no mic cable discussed. So, he really has not explained away perceived differences as he has yet to demonstrate those audible differeences in standard interconnect usages just accepted reports as being factual. Yet, it appears, people extrapolate that mic cable measurements to ordinary interconnects. Does not apply.
But what do I know?
Mtrycraft, there is no need for you to get hysterical about what I have said about Putzeys' article and DellaSala's epilogue. Is it outrageous for me to say I didn't get the impression the article was limited to mic cables and question whether Putzeys agrees with the epilogue? What else did I do?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by okiemax
Mtrycraft, there is no need for you to get hysterical about what I have said about Putzeys' article and DellaSala's epilogue. Is it outrageous for me to say I didn't get the impression the article was limited to mic cables and question whether Putzeys agrees with the epilogue? What else did I do?
"But what do I know?"
How come you never throw me a good straight line?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtrycraft
Oh, you presented a sentenca and tried to draw an underlying concusion that is not there.
Classic. The "sentenca" was a direct quote from your source. The "concusion" was likewise also a direct quote of his. Is English your first language?
rw
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by E-Stat
Classic. The "sentenca" was a direct quote from your source. The "concusion" was likewise also a direct quote of his. Is English your first language?
rw
No matter how you try, you are trying to draw a conclusion from one sentence, period. Good try, doesn't work.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtrycraft
No matter how you try, you are trying to draw a conclusion from one sentence, period. Good try, doesn't work.
Amazing. I am not "trying" to draw any conclusions. There is no need to. The author of the article already has - based upon the body of his work. In this regard, I am taking your "experience free" tact. I merely quoted his summation. Evidently, you lack understanding of some language fundamentals.
sum-mar-y: - A presentation of the substance of a body of material in a condensed form or by reducing it to its main points; an abstract.
Is there any part of that you don't understand?
rw
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by E-Stat
Amazing. I am not "trying" to draw any conclusions. There is no need to. The author of the article already has - based upon the body of his work. In this regard, I am taking your "experience free" tact. I merely quoted his summation. Evidently, you lack understanding of some language fundamentals.
sum-mar-y: - A presentation of the substance of a body of material in a condensed form or by reducing it to its main points; an abstract.
Is there any part of that you don't understand?
rw
Obviously you didn't understand the article and what the conclusion means. Good try.
-
Bravo, Mtry
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtrycraft
Obviously you didn't understand the article and what the conclusion means. Good try.
Your keen observations have even transcended the capabilities of the author of the article itself. I stand amazed at your analytical abilities. :)
rw
-
Misleading
Quote:
Originally Posted by E-Stat
Right on, Mtry. Let's all read the summation together:
"It shows that people who claim that cables do not make a difference are plainly deluding themselves."
rw
Why don'tcha include the rest of the summary?
"It shows that people who claim that cables do not make a difference are plainly deluding themselves. On the other hand, those that say that cables should not make a difference, are dead right."
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat D
Why don'tcha include the rest of the summary?
"It shows that people who claim that cables do not make a difference are plainly deluding themselves. On the other hand, those that say that cables should not make a difference, are dead right."
Don't forget, the author is talking about measured performance and mic cables in swinging mode, not anything that is related to audibility as he didn't check for that, just relied on unreliable reports from audiophiles and his own perception of dubious reliability. And, no one can disagree with his measurement findings.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat D
Why don'tcha include the rest of the summary?
See post # 53. In the second sentence, the author acknowledges there are instances in audio where theory and practice differ.
http://forums.audioreview.com/showpo...5&postcount=53
rw
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtrycraft
I don't agree.
Obvious:)
There is plenty of evidence of cable sonics.
Where? Cite one such evidence that can be investigated? Claiming that there is one, is not evidence. Please cite it. Just because Jon claimes it is not evidence.Please.
It's simply a matter of whether or not you accept that evidence which in this case is provided by reasonable, intelligent people lending their experience.
Sorry, that is not evidence, especially when it is based on sighted listeing in the first place.
There is no proof that all cables sound alike in all applications.
Now you are distorting what has been stated before. No one is claiming this as there is published evidence for differences between 24 ga and 16 ga and 12 ga wire. You should know this by now so stop repeating this silly all inclusive claim.
As I read ROJ, he's merely saying that we need to be careful of what we recommend in light of the fact that there is no PROOF either way.
No, he says how we recommend.
"Where? Cite one such evidence that can be investigated? Claiming that there is one, is not evidence. Please cite it. Just because Jon claimes it is not evidence.Please."
Yes, it is indeed evidence, at least according to several of the literal definitions by Webster's. You "choose" to refer to it as not being evidence - it isn't good enough for you. I agree that it isn't sufficient evidence and needs to be explored. But it is evidence aplenty for those that perceive these differences. What it isn't is PROOF.
" There is no proof that all cables sound alike in all applications.
Now you are distorting what has been stated before. No one is claiming this as there is published evidence for differences between 24 ga and 16 ga and 12 ga wire. You should know this by now so stop repeating this silly all inclusive claim."
You are, of course, correct. But I don't intend to open each and every sentence using all the disclaimers such as guages, lengths, using music in a non-reverberant room, etc etc. I directed my post at the so-called "naysayers" who make claims of their own and who are fully aware of the issues. Sorry if I was unclear.
"As I read ROJ, he's merely saying that we need to be careful of what we recommend in light of the fact that there is no PROOF either way.
No, he says how we recommend.[/QUOTE"
Correct again. You may not recommend Home Depot wire as being better than something else or proof is required for your claim such as DBT using all known audio gear. You may claim that it is as good based on measurements. You may not claim that there is no audible differences in wire (with all the disclaimers!) without DBT proof using all wire. You may claim that science and what DBT's there have been done don't support cable sonics. The claim that all wire sounds alike unless broken or purposefully tampered with is something you are guilty of and don't be surprised if someone requests you to perform DBT for ALL wire using a "high resolution" system and that you have your results peer reviewed before making such a claim. If you are using the "proof for unsubstantiated claims" defense, be careful that you aren't snagged in your own web.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monstrous Mike
I fully believe that you cannot have an objective discussion on this topic. You may accuse the same of me but I really have no interest in the final outcome of this debate one way or the other. If it turns out that the exotic cable compnaies have been right all along with their unique cable designs then I may or may not explore getting new cables for my system.
On the other hand, if it turns out that a basic cable is all you really need and no amount of handwaving will actually improve system sound, then a lot of people like you will be left scratching their heads wondering that the hell they were hearing in the first place.
Perhaps the spectre of that possibility keeps you steadfastly anchored in your belief about cable sonics, no matter what is discussed.
I remain fully open to the possiblity of cable sonics and if and when somebody shows that they actually make a difference, I will be first in line to find a scientific explanation. And ironically, this sort of investigation should lead to even better cables.
Are open to cable sonics being myth? It sure doesn't sound like it.
First of all, as the other poster said, I'm not a believer in cable sonics. I'm not a disbeliever, either. But I lean towards "extremely skeptical". Hell, I haven't even heard differences in sighted listening! I own fairly cheap cables and I may as well just keep them since they're out of favor with the current market and they work fine. All I'm requesting is a level playing field. There is no "proof" either way and I'm not going to play along as though there is. Your second to last paragraph is exactly the way things should read around here from the scientific community, not the posts that say there is no way cables can make a difference. The latter is a claim and I'll need proof of that claim, just as I would be asked to supply proof if I claimed Cable A sounded better than Cable B. That's all I'm saying.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtrycraft
[b]I forgot about Dr. David Rich, Bell Labs then. I have it if you want it.
Certainly. Thank you
John
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by rb122
"Where? Cite one such evidence that can be investigated? Claiming that there is one, is not evidence. Please cite it. Just because Jon claimes it is not evidence.Please."
Yes, it is indeed evidence, at least according to several of the literal definitions by Webster's. You "choose" to refer to it as not being evidence - it isn't good enough for you. I agree that it isn't sufficient evidence and needs to be explored. But it is evidence aplenty for those that perceive these differences. What it isn't is PROOF.
" There is no proof that all cables sound alike in all applications.
Now you are distorting what has been stated before. No one is claiming this as there is published evidence for differences between 24 ga and 16 ga and 12 ga wire. You should know this by now so stop repeating this silly all inclusive claim."
You are, of course, correct. But I don't intend to open each and every sentence using all the disclaimers such as guages, lengths, using music in a non-reverberant room, etc etc. I directed my post at the so-called "naysayers" who make claims of their own and who are fully aware of the issues. Sorry if I was unclear.
"As I read ROJ, he's merely saying that we need to be careful of what we recommend in light of the fact that there is no PROOF either way.
No, he says how we recommend.[/QUOTE"
Correct again. You may not recommend Home Depot wire as being better than something else or proof is required for your claim such as DBT using all known audio gear. You may claim that it is as good based on measurements. You may not claim that there is no audible differences in wire (with all the disclaimers!) without DBT proof using all wire. You may claim that science and what DBT's there have been done don't support cable sonics. The claim that all wire sounds alike unless broken or purposefully tampered with is something you are guilty of and don't be surprised if someone requests you to perform DBT for ALL wire using a "high resolution" system and that you have your results peer reviewed before making such a claim. If you are using the "proof for unsubstantiated claims" defense, be careful that you aren't snagged in your own web.
"But I don't intend to open each and every sentence using all the disclaimers such as guages, lengths, using music in a non-reverberant room, etc etc."
Ah, but they will harpoon you everytime you don't. They use such tactics to divert attention from the fact that their goal is not to inform, but to propagate their own (not so cleverly) thinly disguised "claims". Fortunately people like you are smart enough to see through it.
-
Being a lawyer...
..you should be used to all the "weasel words" as some might characterize what I see as legitimate parameters for comparison purposes...roast pork and ham come from the same animal, but they hardly taste the same...
jimHJJ(...how's the new vehicle?...)
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Resident Loser
..you should be used to all the "weasel words" as some might characterize what I see as legitimate parameters for comparison purposes...roast pork and ham come from the same animal, but they hardly taste the same...
jimHJJ(...how's the new vehicle?...)
I'm guessing that if "weasel words" were outlawed, at least 99% of communication between and among humans would stop. Lawyers may have elevated the weasel to the defacto national mascot, but we certainly don't find ourselves alone in rodent section of the zoo (Bugsy, please forgive me for casting aspersions on your cousins).
Vehicle's great - it really is amazing to me how good vehicles have become from a comfort and usability standpoint. Now if we could just solve that pesky little environmental problem.
While you didn't ask, Bugsy's great also.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by rb122
First of all, as the other poster said, I'm not a believer in cable sonics. I'm not a disbeliever, either. But I lean towards "extremely skeptical". Hell, I haven't even heard differences in sighted listening! I own fairly cheap cables and I may as well just keep them since they're out of favor with the current market and they work fine. All I'm requesting is a level playing field. There is no "proof" either way and I'm not going to play along as though there is. Your second to last paragraph is exactly the way things should read around here from the scientific community, not the posts that say there is no way cables can make a difference. The latter is a claim and I'll need proof of that claim, just as I would be asked to supply proof if I claimed Cable A sounded better than Cable B. That's all I'm saying.
You're right. Perhaps I have been reading too many of e-stat's post and it is clouding my view of everything.
There is no concrete evidence either way in this cable debate, however, current laws of physics and electricity point to it being unlikely that cables sonics exist, especially to the extent claimed by some people's anecdotes.
But I still stand behind my assertion that it is not up to people who do not believe in cable sonics to prove it. That would be impossible. On the other hand, it would only take a proper test with two cables, one basic, one exotic and show that they sound different. And as a bonus, a scientist could then investigate and discover the reason for the difference. That would prove the cable believers side of the arguement. This is infinitely easier than me disproving their side.
Thus, I don't believe the burden of proof is equal to both sides since the amount of work needed to disprove cable sonics greatly outweighs what could be used as evidence for cable sonics.
-
This is beautiful!
Quote:
Originally Posted by pctower
. Lawyers may have elevated the weasel to the defacto national mascot,
Excellent!
As to your other post, I can understand them requesting the additional clarification if they feel the poster (me, in this case) isn't aware of all the qualifiers. I am. There are several - have to use music instead of pink noise, someone hear differences while sitting a couple inches from their speakers, guage of wire, etc etc etc. So I don't feel the need to mention each and every one each and every time.
I'm not a "wire guy" either but I've always appreciated your take on things audio - if it gives you pleasure and you perceive an improvement, nothing else matters with respect to your listening. I concur. But I bristle at all the demands for proof of claims from one side when claims fly on the opposite side with no proof. A level playing field, please, gentlemen, and then on with the debate.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by rb122
But I bristle at all the demands for proof of claims from one side when claims fly on the opposite side with no proof. A level playing field, please, gentlemen, and then on with the debate.
Can you be more specific on what claims have been made?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockwell
Can you be more specific on what claims have been made?
Sure, as long as you don't ask me to name them with dates, etc. The biggest and most boisterous claim I've read on this site is that cables all sound alike and before I get into trouble again, add all the usual disclaimers. This claim is that people are wasting their money on cables, they are imagining things, they are foolish for believing, etc. There is no proof of this claim, just as there is no proof of cable sonics.
I'm really not concerned with cables, to be honest. But I've heard the same claim made with respect to electronics and whereas it's been demanded of me that I supply proof of what I've heard, I've seen no proof from the other side.
We can have a board where we all get together and share experiences or we can have a board where only scientific proof will suffice. Which is it going to be? It doesn't seem to work as both.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monstrous Mike
You're right. Perhaps I have been reading too many of e-stat's post and it is clouding my view of everything.
There is no concrete evidence either way in this cable debate, however, current laws of physics and electricity point to it being unlikely that cables sonics exist, especially to the extent claimed by some people's anecdotes.
But I still stand behind my assertion that it is not up to people who do not believe in cable sonics to prove it. That would be impossible. On the other hand, it would only take a proper test with two cables, one basic, one exotic and show that they sound different. And as a bonus, a scientist could then investigate and discover the reason for the difference. That would prove the cable believers side of the arguement. This is infinitely easier than me disproving their side.
Thus, I don't believe the burden of proof is equal to both sides since the amount of work needed to disprove cable sonics greatly outweighs what could be used as evidence for cable sonics.
I don't disagree with your assertion. And you make a great point that if this test were performed and differences found, having the scientist then investigate might lead to even better cables. Perhaps that idea might prompt a few "yeasayers" to undergo some testing???? If better cables could be made because scientists understand what makes them better, those NBS cables might cost...oh...$1000/meter instead of $3000. Yikes!
But you have to admit that you "believe" that cable sonics don't exist - you don't "know" it. Granted, your belief is based on solid scientific knowledge but it's still a belief rather than a fact. And I think you grasp that but others apparently do not.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by rb122
I don't disagree with your assertion. those NBS cables might cost...oh...$1000/meter instead of $3000. Yikes!
.
Or, they could be made and sold for only $.50ft at Home Depot.Since no evidence exists that HD $.30/ft cable is any different from that $1000/m cable, why would it be so difficult to marginally improve it for that $.20/ft?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by rb122
Sure, as long as you don't ask me to name them with dates, etc. The biggest and most boisterous claim I've read on this site is that cables all sound alike and before I get into trouble again, add all the usual disclaimers. This claim is that people are wasting their money on cables, they are imagining things, they are foolish for believing, etc. There is no proof of this claim, just as there is no proof of cable sonics.
I'm really not concerned with cables, to be honest. But I've heard the same claim made with respect to electronics and whereas it's been demanded of me that I supply proof of what I've heard, I've seen no proof from the other side.
We can have a board where we all get together and share experiences or we can have a board where only scientific proof will suffice. Which is it going to be? It doesn't seem to work as both.
If you can't supply specifics, then you are just generalizing and misinforming.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtrycraft
Or, they could be made and sold for only $.50ft at Home Depot.Since no evidence exists that HD $.30/ft cable is any different from that $1000/m cable, why would it be so difficult to marginally improve it for that $.20/ft?
It probably wouldn't. But it wouldn't sell to audiophiles at $.50/ft. :)
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockwell
If you can't supply specifics, then you are just generalizing and misinforming.
With all due respect, I find it impossible to believe that someone who has posted 142 times on this board could have missed them! If you feel I am "generalizing and misinforming" then please don't take my word for it. Do some research on this board or simply hang around awhile longer.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by rb122
If better cables could be made because scientists understand what makes them better.....
This is really one of the roots of my suspicions that cables sonics don't exist. In science and engineering, new research by scientists is applied by engineers to build new, or improve existing products or devices or systems. There is a very well known process of discovery, application, design and testing, Then these results are analysed and improvements are implemented where necessary.
Even in the commercial cable industry, these principles are followed and the best cable for a given application is used. However, none even come close to the pricing of home audio cables, even custom military cables which I am familiar with and have ordered.
In general, the home audio cable industry has not followed these principles as far as I can tell. It may be they found that people simply bought more expensive cables and they didn't need to go the usual route for product improvement. I really don't know.
But you have to understand that as an engineer myself, I can only look at the entire exotic cable industry as a bunch of witch doctors, as do all of the other engineers I know and most other engineers around here too. They may still be on to something but given the lack of information on research, testing, etc., then they are either lucky or ahead of their time.
I have investigated many areas of engineering either for the need of my job, or simply for professional curiousity. The whole audio cable industry sticks out like a sore thumb by having a complete lack of adhering to standard protocols for product or system development.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by rb122
With all due respect, I find it impossible to believe that someone who has posted 142 times on this board could have missed them! If you feel I am "generalizing and misinforming" then please don't take my word for it. Do some research on this board or simply hang around awhile longer.
I've been here for years, and and I can't deny that some or all those things have been said at one point, but you are accusing a whole group of making those statements.
-
Additionally...
Quote:
Originally Posted by rb122
With all due respect, I find it impossible to believe that someone who has posted 142 times on this board could have missed them! If you feel I am "generalizing and misinforming" then please don't take my word for it. Do some research on this board or simply hang around awhile longer.
Saying that there is no evidence to suggest that cables* are audibly different from one another is different from saying that all cable sound alike. They may sound different, but no one has demonstated that they are.
* usual disclaimers for adequate guage etc
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockwell
I've been here for years, and and I can't deny that some or all those things have been said at one point, but you are accusing a whole group of making those statements.
If that's how I've come across, I will publicly apologize to those I have accused and say that it was not my intent to do so. The only group I am targeting is the group that makes claims unsupported by proof. They reside on both sides of the debate and that's my whole point.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monstrous Mike
But you have to understand that as an engineer myself, I can only look at the entire exotic cable industry as a bunch of witch doctors, as do all of the other engineers I know and most other engineers around here too. .
I appreciate your stance. My only small reply would be that the designers of these exotic cables are also engineers and scientists and have a different outlook on the industry than you do. But it's probably hard to get them to explain their premises without getting into all the hype, I would imagine.
-
I have tried to keep an open mind about audio cables. The companies that make and sell them don't make it easy. The burden of proof is on them to show that their more expensive product is better and therefore worth the extra cost. They haven't done it. I have no doubt that the infinitely inventive mind of man can eventually design an audio cable which sounds different than other cables. And whatever that difference is, there will be at least some people who will say it is better. But different doesn't always mean better and they have the burden of proof to demonstrate that as well. It is entirely plausible that the ordinary cables we have been accostomed to using for many decades do their job so well that further audible improvement is impossible. In fact, that is what all of the scientific evidence available points to. Far from being developed in a vacuum, these products were developed over a period of a hundred years and their applications, characteristics, and requirements are well understood by both the manufacturers and professionals who have relied on them. The exotic cable industry is on the other hand targeted strictly at a consumer market which lacks the sophistication, knowledge, and often skepticism to make critical judgements as to their worth. That is the principal reason as I see it that this cottage industry has flourished as it has.
As for engineers, they are people just like everyone else and they don't always make or sell products that they belive in. They are in business to make money whether as employees or as owners of companies and not everyone has the scruples to reject involovement with products which may be fakes but at the very least harm nobody except for their bank accounts. This is not like patent medicine which might cause customers to forgo true medical treatment or cause injury. Nobody ever got hurt or died from buying exotic audio cables as far as I know.
-
Insightful post. Thanks.
"Nobody ever got hurt or died from buying exotic audio cables as far as I know."
Well, I threatened the salesman that sold the Audioquest to me but I didn't follow through!
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by rb122
I appreciate your stance. My only small reply would be that the designers of these exotic cables are also engineers and scientists and have a different outlook on the industry than you do. But it's probably hard to get them to explain their premises without getting into all the hype, I would imagine.
Here's something else to chew on. Some audio cable companies have no scientists or engineers at all on staff. Entrepreneurs simply order custom cable from a cable manufacturering company like Belden, perhaps getting them to add this twist or that braid, and then cover it with a thick, colorful plastic jacket. All that is needed after that is a business man and a marketer. No need for testing.
Further, engineering has a code of ethics, much like the Hippocratic Oath that doctors take. I have a stamp that I put on any work I do as an engineer signifying I stand behind my design. I really like to see some stamps on those cable designs. But then again, if no testing documentation or research and design process dcoumentation is presented, and people still pay through the teeth, then there's nothing that can be done. We don't know if these cables were designed and tested by engineers or made up by business people who know the limits of advertising and what they can get away with.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by rb122
But it wouldn't sell to audiophiles at $.50/ft. :)
That's the problem. Many think it must cost a lot to be considered worthy in their homes or approval by like minded folks :D
-
"Further, engineering has a code of ethics, much like the Hippocratic Oath that doctors take. I have a stamp that I put on any work I do as an engineer signifying I stand behind my design. "
I wouldn't want people to get the wrong idea about engineers. They run the gamut from genius to incompetent, from those with the highest ethics to pure skunks. There are many incompetent engineers with PE licenses that I've met in my life who will not only stamp anything for money, they will illegally stamp the work of other people who did not work under them. In some states, that is a crime called "planstamping" an in my state, it is punishible by a $2800 fine per offense. Each drawing stamped is another offense. It can also lead to suspension or revokation of the PE's license. It doesn't stop some people though. If you do stamp drawings I hope you have malpractice insurance for errors and omissions. In some cases, the stamping engineer is liable "in perpetuity" meaning for life, even if the company he worked for went out of business.
I don't think there is much risk or even any need to stamp drawings or specifications of audio cable. You just bid out what you want to half a dozen or a dozen manufacturers and they supply as much as you want OEM with your name and Logo on it. If it comes from someplace where quality control is poor such as many factories in the far east, you may get an inferior product. So that expensive audio cable with whats his name's brand on it may be low quality mass produced goods dressed up to look like something of value but not up to the standards of Belden or its competitors. Buyer beware.
-
Monstrous Mike & Skeptic (and all others!)
You should check out the General Asylum for the post regarding JPS Labs. They have allegedly repackaged standard Eupen wire (complete with the model #) in a new jacket and resold it for a very handsome increase in price. Sorry I don't know how to post the link. I'm not saying it's true but it's an interesting topic in light of your recent posts on this board.
|