Wire is no Wire: The proof? You decide!

[bturk667]

Brought home identical CD players.
Hook them up to my linestage. CD player one connected to the linestage via a interconnect from a high-end manufacturer. CD player two connected to the linestage via a cheap Radio Shack interconnect. Too bad Home Depoit does not make them!
Placed to indentical CD into each players.
Four friends sitting in room; the test subjects. They had no idea what I was going to do. None of them are even close to being audiophiles! Hell, two do not even own a system, just Boom Boxes. They thought me stranger than usual!
Pressed play on both remotes; made sure that the CD's were timed exactly!
Then I proceeded to switch back and forth between the two Cd players by turning selector knob on my linestage; input one and two.
Would the test subjects hear a difference?


YES, THEY DID!!! Not just one or two of then, but all four!

Take my test for what you will. Those you do not believe in the benefits a interconnect can make to the sound of a system, please, keep believing in what you believe in. I know you will shoot dowm my test because it wasn't a DBT. I'm sure you will find some kind of fault with how I conducted my test; you have to!

For those who are intrested in the notion that interconnects MAY benefit the sound your systems, try this test for yourself. Let YOUR EARS decide for you! DO NOT TAKE MY WORD FOR IT, PLEASE! Try this test yourselves. Again, what do you have to lose?

[okiemax]

Brought home identical CD players.
Hook them up to my linestage. CD player one connected to the linestage via a interconnect from a high-end manufacturer. CD player two connected to the linestage via a cheap Radio Shack interconnect. Too bad Home Depoit does not make them!
Placed to indentical CD into each players.
Four friends sitting in room; the test subjects. They had no idea what I was going to do. None of them are even close to being audiophiles! Hell, two do not even own a system, just Boom Boxes. They thought me stranger than usual!
Pressed play on both remotes; made sure that the CD's were timed exactly!
Then I proceeded to switch back and forth between the two Cd players by turning selector knob on my linestage; input one and two.
Would the test subjects hear a difference?


YES, THEY DID!!! Not just one or two of then, but all four!

Take my test for what you will. Those you do not believe in the benefits a interconnect can make to the sound of a system, please, keep believing in what you believe in. I know you will shoot dowm my test because it wasn't a DBT. I'm sure you will find some kind of fault with how I conducted my test; you have to!

For those who are intrested in the notion that interconnects MAY benefit the sound your systems, try this test for yourself. Let YOUR EARS decide for you! DO NOT TAKE MY WORD FOR IT, PLEASE! Try this test yourselves. Again, what do you have to lose?

I believe interconnects can make a difference, and it could be they did in your system. However, your experiment probably won't convince any doubters, since it wasn't double blind. From your description, I can't tell whether it was single-blind. Was the switching just AB,BA or did you try to conceal which interconnect was being used by adding some AA and BB?

[bturk667]

Single blind test. There was no need to conceal the interconnects; they had no idea what was being tested. Okay, well other than themselves.

[brigrizzme]

Read John Dunvaly's article on wires.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's all poop. Go to Lowes or Home Depot and buy new wires.

[bturk667]

Did he or did he not offer cables?

[okiemax]

Read John Dunvaly's article on wires.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's all poop. Go to Lowes or Home Depot and buy new wires.

I'm not sure which article you have in mind. I believe there were experiments where subjects were asked to listen to (1)a zip cord, and (2)a zip cord disguised as a fancy cable. Although the subjects didn't know the latter was just a zip cord, they thought it sounded better.

I don't know the details of these experiments, but I have reservations about drawing conclusions from the testing if what happened is similar to what I fear may have happened. Consider the following possibility of a conversation between a researcher and a subject.

Researcher: "I would like for you to listen to recorded music using this small cord and this large cable, and tell me which you think sounds best, if you prefer one."

Subject: Agrees to do the test, but thinks to himself "He probably wants me to choose the large cable because he already knows it sounds best."

Researcher: "Now that you have completed the experiment, which one did you think sounds best?"

Subject:"I liked the large cable better than the small cord."

Researcher: " Why did you like it better?"

Subject: "There was more detail, the bass went lower, and the soundstage seemed wider and deeper."

Researcher: "Thank you for participating." The researcher never tells the subject that both the small cords and the large cables are the same.


If an experiment was like this example, what conclusions could be made?

[mtrycraft]

I'm not sure which article you have in mind. I believe there were experiments where subjects were asked to listen to (1)a zip cord, and (2)a zip cord disguised as a fancy cable. Although the subjects didn't know the latter was just a zip cord, they thought it sounded better.

I don't know the details of these experiments, but I have reservations about drawing conclusions from the testing if what happened is similar to what I fear may have happened. Consider the following possibility of a conversation between a researcher and a subject.

Researcher: "I would like for you to listen to recorded music using this small cord and this large cable, and tell me which you think sounds best, if you prefer one."

Subject: Agrees to do the test, but thinks to himself "He probably wants me to choose the large cable because he already knows it sounds best."

Researcher: "Now that you have completed the experiment, which one did you think sounds best?"

Subject:"I liked the large cable better than the small cord."

Researcher: " Why did you like it better?"

Subject: "There was more detail, the bass went lower, and the soundstage seemed wider and deeper."

Researcher: "Thank you for participating." The researcher never tells the subject that both the small cords and the large cables are the same.


If an experiment was like this example, what conclusions could be made?

That is simple. It shows how biased humans are, that experimentally, as has been demonstrated time and time again, people will claim to detect a difference 75% rate when in fact the same component was presented over and over.
This is exactely why DBT listening is conducted. While some will say foul, this is a legitimate test method.

John Dunlavy has also tested his cable to the 12 ga zip with null results.

[okiemax]

That is simple. It shows how biased humans are, that experimentally, as has been demonstrated time and time again, people will claim to detect a difference 75% rate when in fact the same component was presented over and over.
This is exactely why DBT listening is conducted. While some will say foul, this is a legitimate test method.

John Dunlavy has also tested his cable to the 12 ga zip with null results.

WRONG! Whatever was used to cover the zip cord to make it look bigger also made it sound better.

Seriously, the test may have its own bias. It could be the participant is just doing what he thinks he is supposed to do in choosing the big cable as sounding best rather than the small one. After all, isn't bigger supposed to be better? And wasn't the participant asked to make a decision? It also could be the participant feels the researcher prefers the big cable, and he wants to agree with the researcher or please him.

Wife buys a dozen brownies at bakery and serves them to husband on two plates. "Honey, the brownies on this plate I made myself, and those on the other plate are from the bakery. Which do you prefer? Husband tries each, and then remarks "Oh, yours are much better." Wife: Why do you like them better? Husband: "Well, they are richer and have more chocolate flavor."

[zapr]

...........Why bother? What's the difference?...........Zapr.

[bturk667]

Trust me, it was no bother. In fact it was quite fun!
The difference is that there is a difference!

[FLZapped]

Brought home identical CD players.
Hook them up to my linestage. CD player one connected to the linestage via a interconnect from a high-end manufacturer. CD player two connected to the linestage via a cheap Radio Shack interconnect. Too bad Home Depoit does not make them!
Placed to indentical CD into each players.
Four friends sitting in room; the test subjects. They had no idea what I was going to do. None of them are even close to being audiophiles! Hell, two do not even own a system, just Boom Boxes. They thought me stranger than usual!
Pressed play on both remotes; made sure that the CD's were timed exactly!
Then I proceeded to switch back and forth between the two Cd players by turning selector knob on my linestage; input one and two.
Would the test subjects hear a difference?


YES, THEY DID!!! Not just one or two of then, but all four!

Take my test for what you will. Those you do not believe in the benefits a interconnect can make to the sound of a system, please, keep believing in what you believe in. I know you will shoot dowm my test because it wasn't a DBT. I'm sure you will find some kind of fault with how I conducted my test; you have to!

For those who are intrested in the notion that interconnects MAY benefit the sound your systems, try this test for yourself. Let YOUR EARS decide for you! DO NOT TAKE MY WORD FOR IT, PLEASE! Try this test yourselves. Again, what do you have to lose?

You mean besides the fact there is no way you can exactly cue them with a remote, nor were they level matched, nor were they even characterized for frequency response differences.

-Bruce

[bturk667]

Sorry, it is quite easy to cue them with a remote!
Level match? Why?
"Nor were they ever characterized for frequency response differences." How do you know they weren't. I never wrote either way. Would that make a difference it the way they would make my system sound?

[FLZapped]

Sorry, it is quite easy to cue them with a remote!
Level match? Why?

The louder of the two is almost always interpreted as sounding better.

"Nor were they ever characterized for frequency response differences." How do you know they weren't. I never wrote either way. Would that make a difference it the way they would make my system sound?

Yep.

-Bruce

[bturk667]

My linestage is passive. That being stated, I knew that somone would bring this point up; it is very important to make sure levels match when comparing speakers. So yes, I used my Radio Shack SPL level meter, cat. no. 33-2050. I used the C weighting. My test CD was Sterophile test CD no. 1, track #20 1khz 1/3-octave warble tone, and no.3, tracks 22-27. No problem there! I tried to be somewhat thorough; also trying to predict question having to do with my test. Now I will admitt I could have done more, but why? My test I believe was thorough enough. After all I love my interconnects, and do not regrett any of the choices I have made in assembling my system.

As for your frequency response question; based on manufacturers specifications, this to was not an issue.

The test was fun, the problem is that my friends think I am even stranger that they thought I was before.

So you believe interconnects can affect the sound of ones system?

[mtrycraft]

My linestage is passive. That being stated, I knew that somone would bring this point up; it is very important to make sure levels match when comparing speakers. So yes, I used my Radio Shack SPL level meter, cat. no. 33-2050. I used the C weighting. My test CD was Sterophile test CD no. 1, track #20 1khz 1/3-octave warble tone, and no.3, tracks 22-27. No problem there! I tried to be somewhat thorough; also trying to predict question having to do with my test. Now I will admitt I could have done more, but why? My test I believe was thorough enough. After all I love my interconnects, and do not regrett any of the choices I have made in assembling my system.

As for your frequency response question; based on manufacturers specifications, this to was not an issue.

The test was fun, the problem is that my friends think I am even stranger that they thought I was before.

So you believe interconnects can affect the sound of ones system?

WOW. If your line stage is passive, you have a problem right off the bat, especially if the output impedance is variable with the volume control. The passive setup will certainly roll with cable capacitance differences differently.

What else you neglected to mention?

SPL meter is not sufficient to match to .1dB level differences, sorry. You need a volt meter, measuing the voltage difference at the speaker terminal, one that is accurate at such frequencies and is able to do .01 v differences.
But these are some of the small issues.

I bet your passive pre is the culprit!!!

[mtrycraft]

The louder of the two is almost always interpreted as sounding better.



Yep.

-Bruce

Check out his passive preamp. If th eoutput impedance is high, or varies with the volume control which many do, that is the cause of his differences. They are sensitive to cap differences with such high impedance.

[Rikki]

I know you will shoot dowm my test because it wasn't a DBT.

sorry, but what does DBT stand for ?

[Bill L]

It means "Done By Them"

[Rockwell]

sorry, but what does DBT stand for ?

Double-Blind Test

See this link for an explanation:
http://skepdic.com/control.html

[Rikki]

Double-Blind Test

See this link for an explanation:
http://skepdic.com/control.html

Thanks for the link Rockwell.

Here's what I got from the article
"A double-blind test is a control group test where neither the evaluator nor the subject knows which items are controls."

So I'm assuming a single-blind test would be...
A single-blind test is a control group test where the subject does not know which items are controls but the evaluator does. (my definition) Is it correct ?

Given that, I have the same question about this experiment that another reply did. Was it at least single-blinded ? Or did you lead the witnesses ?

[Rockwell]

Thanks for the link Rockwell.

Here's what I got from the article
"A double-blind test is a control group test where neither the evaluator nor the subject knows which items are controls."

So I'm assuming a single-blind test would be...
A single-blind test is a control group test where the subject does not know which items are controls but the evaluator does. (my definition) Is it correct ?

Given that, I have the same question about this experiment that another reply did. Was it at least single-blinded ? Or did you lead the witnesses ?

Yes, with single blind the person running the test knows what is being tested and may communicate with the testers invalidating the results.

[bturk667]

None of that was done I assure you!

[bturk667]

Double Blind Test!

[okiemax]

sorry, but what does DBT stand for ?

As you already know from the other posts, DBT or double-blind testing reduces the possibility of bias being introduced by researchers who conduct the test. Triple-blind testing goes even farther and reduces the possibility of bias by those who tabulate and analyze the data from the test. I am not aware any triple-blind test on cables. Because of the possibility of bias and other issues affecting the validity of blinded testing, I do not agree with others on this Forum who say the DBT is the gold standard of cable testing.

You also should know that blinded terminlogy is not precise and can be ambiguous. An article titled "Physician Interpretations and Textbook Definitions of Blinding Terminology in Randomized Controlled Trials" in the April 18, 2001 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) discusses this problem, and goes so far as to recommend that terms such as double-blinded be abandoned and replaced with descriptions of who was blinded for the purpose of the test. An excerpt from the JAMA article is shown below:

"Our study has demonstrated enormous ambiguity in the conventional ways of describing blinding. Our results suggest that authors and journal editors should abandon the terms single, double, and triple blind, and substitute descriptions stating which of the relevant groups were unaware of allocation. This change in reporting would be consistent with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement, which calls for reporting of the blinding status of the specific groups involved in RCTs.39 As long as journal reports of RCTs include the term "double blind," clinicians will risk inaccurate inferences about the validity of the studies on which they base their clinical practice."

[mtrycraft]

Brought home identical CD players.
Hook them up to my linestage. CD player one connected to the linestage via a interconnect from a high-end manufacturer. CD player two connected to the linestage via a cheap Radio Shack interconnect. Too bad Home Depoit does not make them!
Placed to indentical CD into each players.
Four friends sitting in room; the test subjects. They had no idea what I was going to do. None of them are even close to being audiophiles! Hell, two do not even own a system, just Boom Boxes. They thought me stranger than usual!
Pressed play on both remotes; made sure that the CD's were timed exactly!
Then I proceeded to switch back and forth between the two Cd players by turning selector knob on my linestage; input one and two.
Would the test subjects hear a difference?


YES, THEY DID!!! Not just one or two of then, but all four!

Take my test for what you will. Those you do not believe in the benefits a interconnect can make to the sound of a system, please, keep believing in what you believe in. I know you will shoot dowm my test because it wasn't a DBT. I'm sure you will find some kind of fault with how I conducted my test; you have to!

For those who are intrested in the notion that interconnects MAY benefit the sound your systems, try this test for yourself. Let YOUR EARS decide for you! DO NOT TAKE MY WORD FOR IT, PLEASE! Try this test yourselves. Again, what do you have to lose?

Beside what the others mentioned, how did you make sure the two CDs were in fact identical? Did you do a bit perfect check? Or just relied ont eh fact that the titles are the same?

Sorry, but to date, no DBT has been able to corroborate your findings. Maybe next year, Next century?