Wire is no Wire: The proof? You decide!

[ROJ]

As I have been reading posts from both sides of the debate, it seems that the research literature does not provide a definitive answer about whether differences in cables exist that can affect sound quality. Given the lack of research evidence, it is difficult for me to understand how people can make such strong definitive statements for either side of the debate since most of us seem to be relying on our own anecdotal evidence. The focus of the debate often seems to be on the internal validity of the listening sessions, i.e., was a DBT performed or not performed, which is an important aspect of a well designed experiment.

It also seems important to consider the external validity of the listening sessions, which does not seem to be discussed that often in the cable debate. The externality validity of the listening sessions seems to be especially important given that there are so many variables that can affect sound quality besides the cables and bias. These variables vary from system to system and include the quality of the speakers, cd players, amps, pre amps, quality of the cd recording, and room acoustics. Just because I can or can not hear a difference in cables in my system may not necessarily predict whether someone else will hear or will not hear a difference in cables in their system because we could have very different systems. Since we are generally relying on anecdotal evidence, the strongest statement that it seems we can make is that cables may make a difference in some system and not in other systems and this can be due to actual cable differences, poor internal validity (no DBT, bias), or poor external validity.

[Rikki]

Just because I can or can not hear a difference in cables in my system may not necessarily predict whether someone else will hear or will not hear a difference in cables in their system

True, but should I still spend money on the cables if I can't hear a difference ?

[pctower]

True, but should I still spend money on the cables if I can't hear a difference ?

HOLY COW!

Who ever suggested that you should?

[Rikki]

HOLY COW!

Correction, it should read HOLY COW! BATMAN!!

[ROJ]

True, but should I still spend money on the cables if I can't hear a difference ?

Nope. In the absence of definitive proof, I think the choice to spend or not spend money on nicer cables is system dependent. I don't doubt those that don't hear differences or those that do hear differences. The only thing I doubt is our ability to definitively tell someone else if cables will make a difference in their system.

[mtrycraft]

I don't doubt those that don't hear differences or those that do hear differences. The only thing I doubt is our ability to definitively tell someone else if cables will make a difference in their system.

But, if there were such cable differences, in a specific system, that would already have been demonstrated by someone, under bias controlled conditions. Yet, when a cable maker with a supposedly high end system, $250K+ cannot hear differences, or refuses to subject himself and his reputation
http://www.vxm.com/21R.64.html

I have very little doubt. But, I certainly can change my mind with evidence.

[ROJ]

But, if there were such cable differences, in a specific system, that would already have been demonstrated by someone, under bias controlled conditions. Yet, when a cable maker with a supposedly high end system, $250K+ cannot hear differences, or refuses to subject himself and his reputation
http://www.vxm.com/21R.64.html

I have very little doubt. But, I certainly can change my mind with evidence.

Hi mtrycraft,

Thank you for the link. It is an interesting article. Do you happen to know if the paper that Mr. Nousaine presented at the conference was published in a scientific journal? I am new to the audio world. Given my limited readings on this and other message boards, I have read claims by people who reportedly conducted DBT experiments in support of their positions on both sides. My bias, however, is to give more credence to experiments that have been published in peer reviewed journals. The best journals (unfortunately, not all journals are the same) rigorously examine the relevance and validity (internal and external) of experiments before publishing the results. Presenting research at a conference is not the same as publishing in a scientific journal since the criteria for presentation at a conference are often less rigorous than publication in a scientific journal. I am not familiar with the scientific literature regarding cable differences or if the literature even exists. Given the passion of the debate, I assumed that if there were a substantial research literature it would have been cited. Absence a scientific literature, I maintain that it is difficult to definitively state that cables will or will not make a difference. It appears that right now we are basing recommendations on anecdotal evidence and experiments that have not undergone the scientific rigorous of being published in peer reviewed journals.

I hope you realize that I am not trying to change your opinion about cables as I have no doubt that you don’t hear differences in cables. I respect the passion that you and others obviously have for hi-fi audio and the cable debate. I am increasingly becoming more passionate about hi-fi audio as my empty pocketbook and weary wife can attest. The only thing I hope to add to the cable debate is that including DBT in cable experiments is only one component in designing a scientifically rigorous experiment. It appears that we are not basing our recommendation on scientifically rigorous experiment. Given my bias for peer reviewed journals and the absence of peer reviewed experiments, I think we should moderate our positions and allow for the possibility that some people hear differences and other don't, and that it can be difficult to generalize findings from one system to other systems.

-ROJ

[pctower]

Hi mtrycraft,

Thank you for the link. It is an interesting article. Do you happen to know if the paper that Mr. Nousaine presented at the conference was published in a scientific journal? I am new to the audio world. Given my limited readings on this and other message boards, I have read claims by people who reportedly conducted DBT experiments in support of their positions on both sides. My bias, however, is to give more credence to experiments that have been published in peer reviewed journals. The best journals (unfortunately, not all journals are the same) rigorously examine the relevance and validity (internal and external) of experiments before publishing the results. Presenting research at a conference is not the same as publishing in a scientific journal since the criteria for presentation at a conference are often less rigorous than publication in a scientific journal. I am not familiar with the scientific literature regarding cable differences or if the literature even exists. Given the passion of the debate, I assumed that if there were a substantial research literature it would have been cited. Absence a scientific literature, I maintain that it is difficult to definitively state that cables will or will not make a difference. It appears that right now we are basing recommendations on anecdotal evidence and experiments that have not undergone the scientific rigorous of being published in peer reviewed journals.

I hope you realize that I am not trying to change your opinion about cables as I have no doubt that you don’t hear differences in cables. I respect the passion that you and others obviously have for hi-fi audio and the cable debate. I am increasingly becoming more passionate about hi-fi audio as my empty pocketbook and weary wife can attest. The only thing I hope to add to the cable debate is that including DBT in cable experiments is only one component in designing a scientifically rigorous experiment. It appears that we are not basing our recommendation on scientifically rigorous experiment. Given my bias for peer reviewed journals and the absence of peer reviewed experiments, I think we should moderate our positions and allow for the possibility that some people hear differences and other don't, and that it can be difficult to generalize findings from one system to other systems.

-ROJ

Oh man, where have you been for the last two years while I have been pummeled and ridiculed for saying what you have just said?

Perhaps you put it more tactfully than I did or perhaps your writing is more articulate than mine, and perhaps you will be able to open a few minds as a result.

[gonefishin]

Oh man, where have you been for the last two years while I have been pummeled and ridiculed for saying what you have just said?

Perhaps you put it more tactfully than I did or perhaps your writing is more articulate than mine, and perhaps you will be able to open a few minds as a result.

Pc...you always seemed like a nice enough guy. Do you remember the advice I gave you when you first came to AR? lol


Don't think that another voice of reason (with similar thoughts to yourself) will help the cable debate here at AR. Only thing it could do is fuel it! Believe me.


'course, I don't view fueling the debate as a bad thing either...just keep it civil.






The wheels on the bus go round and round, round and round, round and round. The wheels on the bus go round and round...


take care>>>>>>>>>>

[mtrycraft]

Hi mtrycraft,

Thank you for the link. It is an interesting article. Do you happen to know if the paper that Mr. Nousaine presented at the conference was published in a scientific journal? I am new to the audio world. Given my limited readings on this and other message boards, I have read claims by people who reportedly conducted DBT experiments in support of their positions on both sides. My bias, however, is to give more credence to experiments that have been published in peer reviewed journals. The best journals (unfortunately, not all journals are the same) rigorously examine the relevance and validity (internal and external) of experiments before publishing the results. Presenting research at a conference is not the same as publishing in a scientific journal since the criteria for presentation at a conference are often less rigorous than publication in a scientific journal. I am not familiar with the scientific literature regarding cable differences or if the literature even exists. Given the passion of the debate, I assumed that if there were a substantial research literature it would have been cited. Absence a scientific literature, I maintain that it is difficult to definitively state that cables will or will not make a difference. It appears that right now we are basing recommendations on anecdotal evidence and experiments that have not undergone the scientific rigorous of being published in peer reviewed journals.

I hope you realize that I am not trying to change your opinion about cables as I have no doubt that you don’t hear differences in cables. I respect the passion that you and others obviously have for hi-fi audio and the cable debate. I am increasingly becoming more passionate about hi-fi audio as my empty pocketbook and weary wife can attest. The only thing I hope to add to the cable debate is that including DBT in cable experiments is only one component in designing a scientifically rigorous experiment. It appears that we are not basing our recommendation on scientifically rigorous experiment. Given my bias for peer reviewed journals and the absence of peer reviewed experiments, I think we should moderate our positions and allow for the possibility that some people hear differences and other don't, and that it can be difficult to generalize findings from one system to other systems.

-ROJ

No, there are no peer reviewed Journal articles on any audio component, cables to amps. I never indicated there were. The closest ones I can recommend are the ones done by Dr Floyd Toole in JAES about speaker listening and the power of DBT in audio listening and the vagaries of everything else, especially sighted listening for small differences.
All there are are commercial magazine publications. DBT Journal articles would not serve the component makers well, so why would they do any? There is no magic or mistery in audio.

My citation list which can be also found included in the links here:

http://2eyespy.tripod.com/myaudioand...epage/id3.html

this may help as well:

http://www.pcavtech.com/abx/abx_lit.htm

If Journal articles are what you are after, you are out of luck. You will need to conduct your own rigorous trials

As to the possibility of people hearing differences, that is not denied. Differences have been demonstrated under DBT conditions for well know reasons.
What is questioned are their protocols why they think they heard such differences, what is know based on the best information available over the past 20+ years. Empty claims are always challenged, or should be and must be so the urban legend doesn't become a fact simply on an unsupported testable claim.

[ROJ]

No, there are no peer reviewed Journal articles on any audio component, cables to amps. I never indicated there were. The closest ones I can recommend are the ones done by Dr Floyd Toole in JAES about speaker listening and the power of DBT in audio listening and the vagaries of everything else, especially sighted listening for small differences.
All there are are commercial magazine publications. DBT Journal articles would not serve the component makers well, so why would they do any? There is no magic or mistery in audio.

My citation list which can be also found included in the links here:

http://2eyespy.tripod.com/myaudioand...epage/id3.html

this may help as well:

http://www.pcavtech.com/abx/abx_lit.htm

If Journal articles are what you are after, you are out of luck. You will need to conduct your own rigorous trials

As to the possibility of people hearing differences, that is not denied. Differences have been demonstrated under DBT conditions for well know reasons.
What is questioned are their protocols why they think they heard such differences, what is know based on the best information available over the past 20+ years. Empty claims are always challenged, or should be and must be so the urban legend doesn't become a fact simply on an unsupported testable claim.

Hi mtrycrafts,

Is this your home theater system from the links that you provided? http://2eyespy.tripod.com/myaudioand...age/index.html
That is a great looking system. I hope to some day have a system like that once I am done with graduate school. I am a doctoral student in clinical psychology, which is why the cable debate caught my interest. I understand how powerful bias can be in our perceptions. I also understand the importance of examining and controlling for bias (as much as possible) in experimental studies. For the cable debate, it appears that there is not much of a research literature and I am out of luck. I won’t do any studies myself as I doubt my advisor (or wife, who is the real boss) will let me change my dissertation to look at cable differences.

You raised a good point that empty claims should be challenged so that urban legends do not become fact. I would further argue that even generally accepted facts should be continually challenged. In my field (child clinical), there was once a commonly accepted belief that autism (a severe development disorder) was caused by poor maternal parenting. Fortunately, further research showed that autism has a genetic component and that the prior belief caused unnecessary guilt in mothers of autistic children. The nature of science is to continually try and challenge existing beliefs by advancing the knowledge base with well designed experiments. In a sense, it is difficultly to say that we can definitively know anything in the social sciences (which for me includes cable differences since we are talking about perceived differences) as future research can challenge our existing beliefs. I have been trained to qualify my statements, e.g., given the current state of the literature we know this..., while understanding that it can change in the future. Given that I came from this background, it interested me to see such strong statements emanating from both sides of the cable debate given the lack of empirical studies. Even when empirical studies exist, there can be genuine disagreements, which require further research for clarification (for example, the current literature on spanking has some findings that can appear contradictory).

As far as the cable debate, I guess the take home message for me is that people are passionate about this topic and that having peer reviewed studies to answer the debate does not exist or maybe should not necessarily exist. I always enjoy a good debate even if I am arguing without any empirical support such as how the Dallas Cowboys are returning to dominance. So once I try a few more cables, maybe I'll join the fun and starting arguing for or against cable differences.


Thank you for the links and for the interesting exchanges.

-ROJ

[bturk667]

That choice is yours to make!