Dumb things you've heard from "audiophiles"...

halo71

BeefJerky wrote: »

I stand corrected. Thank you.

ummm, Hello??? lol

I give up as well.

BeefJerky

halo71 wrote: »

ummm, Hello??? lol

I give up as well.

That was me admitting that I was in error about the silver tarnish/corrosion thing. Yes, I can admit when I am wrong. A little more reading on the subject clarifies my confusion:
Silver is a better conductor than gold, but gold has better corrosion resistance. It is apparently that simple.

steveinaz

You guys sure do know how to make work out of a hobby. I listen, if I like it---I keep it. I don't walk around the house in a lab coat with a blind-fold on. I only have to justify things to one person....that'd be ME.

In short, if you don't believe that different cable topolgies/materials make a difference, no problem--this hobby will be far less expensive for you. Some cables I can hear differences in, some I cannot. Some, I don't bother with (power cables) because I've got bigger fish to fry, and IN MY PERSONAL OPINION I feel gains there would be extremely subtle at best, and the investment is better spent elsewhere in the system.

Some members of the "Corvette Club" just buy a new 'vette, and are pleased with their purchase/membership. Others want to re-build their 'vette from the ground up. Both are satisfied. Shocking huh?

Everyone has a different level of interest/commitment.

gdb

Like trying to tell which are the **** bubbles in a Jacuzzi !

headrott

heiney9 wrote: »

I also find that the people in your camp beefjerky can suffer from the same placebo effect you accuse us of suffering from. Because you believe there is no difference you trick youself into not hearing differences you could be hearing but because of your bias they are completely ignored or passed over as not being there. It can go both ways you know, except no one in your camp ever experiences that (atleast publically admits it). They assume because they can't hear it, it must not exist. It only is non-existent for the person who can't or refuses to hear it.

H9

I almost pointed this out in my previous post Brock. That is, the fact that people who claim that the numbers dictate that there is no audible difference between power or digital cables can (and, IMO do) suffer from delusion. I refuse to call it placebo effect, because like DBT's the placebo effect is a definition used for another purpose (medical in the case of placebo) and not stereophonic audio practices. Unfortunately, BeefJerky is trying to apply his own definitions of placebo and DBT's to situations they were never intended to be used in. That in itself is a form of delusion, no?

Greg

heiney9

steveinaz wrote: »

Some, I don't bother with (power cables) because I've got bigger fish to fry, and IN MY PERSONAL OPINION I feel gains there would be extremely subtle at best, and the investment is better spent elsewhere in the system.

So you haven't bothered to try any? That's how I read that. Don't give the other side any ammo, Steve.

H9

tonyb

gdb wrote: »

Like trying to tell which are the **** bubbles in a Jacuzzi !

LOL...Ya know, If someone came up with a way to tell, I'd buy that device in a heartbeat. Kinda like that chemical that turns piss blue in a pool. The only other way to tell is when someone's suit suddenly has a huge bubble comming up. Of coarse that depends too if you even have a suit on....then all bets are off.

BlueFox

What I love is when the data contradicts their opinion, which is based on zero experience, this is their fall back answer.

d) None of this necessarily amounts to audible differences.

Anyone with an ounce of electronics knowledge would be able to see the giant flaws in that article.

Then again, maybe the founder and Chief scientist of Shunyata has more than ounce of electronics knowledge.

"I was physical sciences major in college but couldn't quite finish my degree. Money issues. I then entered the military. They don't care about credentials at all. They just test you - thoroughly. They were duly impressed with my abilities and decided to send me to a secret Navy cadre. I obtained the equivalent of an electronics engineering degree and was assigned to a military division of the National Security Agency. The NSA is the governmental information-gathering agency, with the world's most elaborate high-speed computers and signal decoding equipment. We were involved with intense R&D of ultra-sensitive data acquisition systems.

We could lock onto correlated signal virtually obscured by random noise, a feat believed impossible by engineers using commercial electronics of the day. Working on these projects and with other NSA engineers taught me that 'impossible' is a relative term - and one that is not acceptable to overachievers.

Subsequent to my military career, I became involved in the computer industry during the early Internet days under DARPA, working on network architecture. Later I became involved with the development of high-speed networking devices like the 1GB/s fibre-channel interface and the present 100MB/s and 1GB/s Ethernet devices. Working with super-high-speed circuits wreaks havoc with textbook engineering school truisms. You cannot assume that wire had zero resistance, inductance or relative capacitance. In fact, whether a circuit works at all may well have depended on your connectors, interface and the buss system architecture."


Of course, the usual suspects here have zero experience, yet know so much more than Caelin Gabriel. After all, they know big words like resistance, inductance, and capacitance. :rolleyes:


This is a good interview.
http://www.6moons.com/industryfeatures/caelin/caelin.html

decal

Some of you folks should really get out of the house a bit more!!!!!

SDA1C

BeefJerky wrote: »

Please present it.

It has already been presented to mine own eyes on my T.V. Maybe when this (if this) DBT takes place we can also swap out the factory cable for the oppo with the one Pep made for me. if you don't SEE a difference in picture quality and HEAR a smother sound with less sibilance (sp?) then I will admit publicly,you are wrong.

As far as pulling enough juice....the manufacturer sends a cable with my amp commonly referred to as a donkey dick. Surely you aren't suggesting a multi-million dollar manufacturing company is also incorrect?

SDA1C

tonyb wrote: »

LOL...Ya know, If someone came up with a way to tell, I'd buy that device in a heartbeat. Kinda like that chemical that turns piss blue in a pool. The only other way to tell is when someone's suit suddenly has a huge bubble comming up. Of coarse that depends too if you even have a suit on....then all bets are off.

I dont plan to be in a tub naked with anyone that, if they had a suit on, would be loose enough to hold bubbles. (dont know if that made sense but i aint gonna be naked in a tub with a dude with no shorts on)

steveinaz

heiney9 wrote: »

So you haven't bothered to try any? That's how I read that. Don't give the other side any ammo, Steve.

H9

I did buy some nicer, heavier gauge AC cables---nothing esoteric or worth note. Some things don't need to be tried---sorry, I calls them like sees them. I found cables in general (digital/XLR/RCA/speaker) to be rather subtle improvements, nothing earth shattering. I'd rather see somebody sink that money in better speakers personally.

pietro944

headrott wrote: »

I almost pointed this out in my previous post Brock. That is, the fact that people who claim that the numbers dictate that there is no audible difference between power or digital cables can (and, IMO do) suffer from delusion. I refuse to call it placebo effect, because like DBT's the placebo effect is a definition used for another purpose (medical in the case of placebo) and not stereophonic audio practices. Unfortunately, BeefJerky is trying to apply his own definitions of placebo and DBT's to situations they were never intended to be used in. That in itself is a form of delusion, no?

Greg

I agree with BeefJerky and stevieanz.......and yes,over the course of 45 yrs of audiophilia,I have tried many,many pc's, Ic's,digital wunderkids,et al........and btw,when you start using the word "delusional" in your argument,many,many of us,just tune you out as being just another lemming....that said.....here's a smiley,for ya

BlueFox

steveinaz wrote: »

I did buy some nicer, heavier gauge AC cables---nothing esoteric or worth note. Some things don't need to be tried---sorry, I calls them like sees them. I found cables in general (digital/XLR/RCA/speaker) to be rather subtle improvements, nothing earth shattering. I'd rather see somebody sink that money in better speakers personally.

I will be upgrading my speakers later this year. However, I look at the power and IC cables as the foundation. I am getting the foundation solid before moving on to the speakers, and maybe some gear. Personally, when I went to the Shunyata power cords, and Triton power conditioner, the effect was anything but subtle. Same as when I went from the Kimber Kable XLRs to the MIT Shotgun S1.3 XLRs. About as subtle as a sledgehammer.

halo71

Y'all know ghosts are fake to right? Just saying....

DMara

Audiophile-related: http://app.audiogon.com/listings/steinmusic-harmonizer-magic-stone-diamond-acoustic-room--2

headrott

halo71 wrote: »

Y'all know ghosts are fake to right? Just saying....

I can tell you about a couple experiences I've had........

Greg

halo71

headrott wrote: »

I can tell you about a couple experiences I've had........

Greg

Can ya prove it? Ya see where I'm going here right?

F1nut

BeefJerky wrote: »

I have mixed feeling on this guy. Some of the things he says actually make sense, but his power cable claims do not, especially for a low-power device such as a preamp. It's clear he's never had any real training in electronics, since even a basic college-level course would debunk it.

That must be why he arguably designs and builds some of the best pre amps on the market. His OTL amps are note worthy as well. Your opinions, not so much.

deronb1

After reading this last page, the thread title is spot on. :eek:

WilliamM2

halo71 wrote: »

Can ya prove it? Ya see where I'm going here right?

That you will believe in absolutely anything? Not surprising.

amulford

I stand by my previous position...

lanchile

FUSES!!! :razz:

Toolfan66

I know what cables did for my rig and that's all that matters...:loneranger:

markmarc

I would never recommend power cords be the first thing done to improve sound. But once the obvious things have been accomplished i.e. speaker position and room treatments for starters, interconnects, wire and cords would then come into play. When I invested in power cords not only did I listen to them in my rig, but I also tested a few brands and the stock cord with my plasma television. The blacks were blacker, colors more vibrant, images sharper. I even noticed less video noise when running a vacuum test. Hell, my wife even noticed the improvement. That's why I highly recommend the Shunyata Venom cords.

DarqueKnight

BeefJerky wrote: »

Basic knowledge in electronics provides me what I need to know about the (lack of) effects from power cords. I don't buy something based on outrageous and fabricated claims.

What do you know about the effects of electrical noise on signal integrity? Are you aware that most phenomena in electronics cannot be adequately explained by a simple application of Ohm's law? Why do you think electronics and circuit theory textbooks are so thick?

BeefJerky wrote: »

Yes I am. But, I'm willing to back up my claims. Too bad none of ya'll power cord believers are willing to do the same and join me on a DBT!

I'm more than willing to participate in a DBT with PC's and digital interconnects (or any other audio component). Are you?

A valid testing methodology uses test tools and procedures appropriate to the thing being tested. Why do you think DBT is a valid procedure for evaluating individual perceptions of a stereophonic sound field?

I am curious about the specific performance parameters you would evaluate in a DBT for power cords and how you would set up such a test.

I am not clear on how someone else proving that they can hear something will enhance your stereophonic pleasure. If someone proves unequivocally that they can hear something and you cannot hear the same thing under the same conditions, what value is that to you? In other words, if a benefit is proven to exist for 1000 people, yet you cannot perceive it, isn't that the same as the benefit not existing for you? DBT trials can prove that a particular medicine cured 10,000 people. You could take the same medicine and it not work for you.

nwohlford wrote: »

It is probably not exactly a dumb thing, since it does require more knowledge than the average person, but almost any sentence uttered by an audiophile using the word "electron" is bound to be wrong (often spectacularly). I have seen a few comments regarding cutting down on the vibrations of the electrons in their system which is of course crazy talk.

Electron flow through a conductor can be affected by conductor vibration. Are you aware that the resistance of a wire increases with temperature? What happens when temperature increases? The answer is that molecular vibration increases. Are you insisting that there is no causal relationship between mechanical vibration and electrical resistance?

It has been known for a long time that mechanical vibration can also cause electrical noise. This article published in the Journal of Applied Physics in the year 1952 is an example:

"Electrical Noise from Instrument Cables Subjected to Shock and Vibration"

Citation: Journal of Applied Physics, 23, 674, (1952).

You can find many other scholarly articles on the subject if you google "electrical noise vibration".

I am an audiophile and I just used the word "electron". Am I spectacularly wrong?

BeefJerky wrote: »

However, to claim that a properly done DBT isn't useful is pure hogwash. I support DBT, but the participants also need to be able to take as much time as they want to listen to the different elements.

Simply put, if the difference can't be heard in a proper DBT, there is no actual audible difference. Or, to put it another way, the difference you thought you were hearing wasn't actually there.

Isn't it possible that a difference could exist, but a particular listener not be sensitive to it? Spatial representation is one of the primary performance parameters of stereo systems. However, stereophonic sound field perception is a psycho-acoustic phenomenon. It is an illusion.

Are you insisting that DBT is a particularly accurate method for evaluating psycho-acoustic illusions? If so, why?

BeefJerky wrote: »

If you're really not afraid, then I urge you to participate in a properly done DBT

For starters, it would be nice if any of these people could actually prove themselves by DBT. However, I am not aware of any case where this is happened, but feel free to point me out a proper study that supports the claimed differences in power cables.

This "challenge talk" reminds me of the countless people who used to challenge Bruce Lee to fight. Most of the time he would walk away or try to walk away. The "challenger" would then brag about how he "punked" Bruce Lee.

BeefJerky wrote: »

I call BS, plain and simple. If you think a power cord will actually do a better job than even a run-of-the-mill power conditioner, you are just wrong.

I have never run across a case of anyone saying that a power cord is better than an active or passive power line filter. Knowledgeable people know that a well engineered power cord is just one component in a comprehensive system of improving power quality for audio electronics. I use high performance power cords in conjunction with passive power filters, AC regenerators, audio grade fuses and dedicated AC circuits.

BeefJerky wrote: »

I'm certain that you would never be able to provide any measurements to support your claims either. Also, one doesn't need to be deaf to "not hear the differences," they just need to be free of delusions (aka placebo effect).

There actually have been some noise studies done which proved that different power cables do have different electrical noise characteristics. Some people then said that the measured differences were not audible, but they did not provide reasons why the differences should be inaudible.

BeefJerky wrote: »

I don't have the time or money to waste on something that is pure, unbridled snake oil. I prefer to spend my money on things that actually provide me real benefits.

I don't recall seeing a case of anyone here encouraging people to spend time and money on something that didn't work for them. I'm curious as to your reasons for requiring proof for something you are already convinced is worthless? Most people don't pay attention to, or want to test, things they believe to be a waste of time and money.

BeefJerky wrote: »

I have mixed feeling on this guy. Some of the things he says actually make sense, but his power cable claims do not, especially for a low-power device such as a preamp. It's clear he's never had any real training in electronics, since even a basic college-level course would debunk it.

Do you have any knowledge of the transient power demands of electronic components, particularly power amps, when they are reproducing high dynamic range music?

Thank you in advance for your attention to my inquiries.

PSOVLSK

BeefJerky wrote: »

I'm more than willing to participate in a DBT with PC's and digital interconnects (or any other audio component). Are you?

How can one who doesn't believe the cables will make a difference participate in such a test? Wouldn't you just say you hear no difference whether you did or not?

BeefJerky

headrott wrote: »

I almost pointed this out in my previous post Brock. That is, the fact that people who claim that the numbers dictate that there is no audible difference between power or digital cables can (and, IMO do) suffer from delusion. I refuse to call it placebo effect, because like DBT's the placebo effect is a definition used for another purpose (medical in the case of placebo) and not stereophonic audio practices. Unfortunately, BeefJerky is trying to apply his own definitions of placebo and DBT's to situations they were never intended to be used in. That in itself is a form of delusion, no?

Greg

I'm not even close to being the first person to use the term "placebo effect" when referring to audio. I'm also not the first person to suggest applying DBT's for audio. I'm really just not that special. I am, however, intelligent enough to realize that our brain and our senses can play tricks on us. This includes causing us to "hear" differences that aren't really there. Simply put, I don't feel the need to spend money on power cables or esoteric digital audio cables just for a good feeling; they need to actually provide a verifiable difference.

Most of you who claim the benefits of power cords and digital cables are just giving opinion at best. You have absolutely no real proof to back up your claims. However, there is one person here who actually seems willing to give a DBT a try. If that person can confirm a real difference via DBT I am absolutely prepared to eat my words. Furthermore, I would then be willing to buy some higher end power cables and digital cables to try on my own.

BlueFox wrote: »

What I love is when the data contradicts their opinion, which is based on zero experience, this is their fall back answer.

Except the data never contradicted my claims. Let's take a look at my earlier posts.

First, I claimed that the last 2-12ft of cable isn't going to make a difference when you are still running through thousands of feet of the power companies cable and equipment. His tests didn't address this in any way. He tested the cable alone, without taking into consideration the other factors. In addition, he was using unrealistic tests in terms of amperage for power cords designed for a home or studio amplifier. For example, at 100 amps, that would be the equivalent of puling 12,000 watts; nevermind his unrealistic claims of 300 amps. We're hitting the territory of large stadium installs at that point. None of these power cords would be appropriate for that use anyway. They would have a custom hard-wired install with heavy gauge copper wire; nothing fancy, just heavy gauge.

I also claimed that the differences wouldn't be audible. This is something he didn't even try to address.

I pointed out genuine flaws in his testing methodology and article. However, rather than actually addressing those issues, you tried to use a straw-man argument. Simply put, you article does not contradict my claims, nor does your piteous "rebuttal."

Then again, maybe the founder and Chief scientist of Shunyata has more than ounce of electronics knowledge.

"I was physical sciences major in college but couldn't quite finish my degree. Money issues. I then entered the military. They don't care about credentials at all. They just test you - thoroughly. They were duly impressed with my abilities and decided to send me to a secret Navy cadre. I obtained the equivalent of an electronics engineering degree and was assigned to a military division of the National Security Agency. The NSA is the governmental information-gathering agency, with the world's most elaborate high-speed computers and signal decoding equipment. We were involved with intense R&D of ultra-sensitive data acquisition systems.

We could lock onto correlated signal virtually obscured by random noise, a feat believed impossible by engineers using commercial electronics of the day. Working on these projects and with other NSA engineers taught me that 'impossible' is a relative term - and one that is not acceptable to overachievers.

Subsequent to my military career, I became involved in the computer industry during the early Internet days under DARPA, working on network architecture. Later I became involved with the development of high-speed networking devices like the 1GB/s fibre-channel interface and the present 100MB/s and 1GB/s Ethernet devices. Working with super-high-speed circuits wreaks havoc with textbook engineering school truisms. You cannot assume that wire had zero resistance, inductance or relative capacitance. In fact, whether a circuit works at all may well have depended on your connectors, interface and the buss system architecture."


Of course, the usual suspects here have zero experience, yet know so much more than Caelin Gabriel. After all, they know big words like resistance, inductance, and capacitance. :rolleyes:


This is a good interview.
http://www.6moons.com/industryfeatures/caelin/caelin.html

Okay, I read that article, and here are my comments:

a) the stardust stuff - Honestly, I can't really come a clear conclusion on it since his interview was more marketing that anything else in that regard. However, if it does have the properties he claims, it could be interesting. Nonetheless, it wouldn't do anything that a shielded and properly grounded power cord wouldn't be able to do. The reality is, the only thing either of these will do is prevent EMI from entering or leaving the power cord from the air. Nothing more, nothing less. This will not actually fix EMI problems between components, nor will it produce an audible affect.

b) Interference from other devices, including A/V devices via the powerline - This is a valid point. However, his stardust won't fix this. The only thing that will fix that is actual EMI filters between components or on mischievous appliances.

c) Not mentioned in the article, but EMI interference transmitted via the air is also very real. This can be demonstrated by having an older CRT running in the same room as a turntable; you will get a nasty hum. However, since this is transmitted via the air, no amount of power filtering will fix this. You have the option of turning off or unplugging the interfering component, or putting a Faraday cage around the component sensitive to the interference.

d) As far as digital audio cables go, nothing he says actually support the audible difference some claim. The high speed circuits that he is referring to aren't even in the same league as digital audio. For example, standard uncompressed 16/44.1 stereo PCM uses a whopping 1.411Mbps (or 176KB/s). Even uncompresssed 24/192 8-channel audio only uses 36.864Mbps (or 4.608MB/s) of bandwidth. To compare even the 4.608MB/s bandwidth to his mention of 100MB/s in ludicrous. They certainly don't require the same critical cable standards, nor are those data rates going to have the same issues the "super-high-speed circuits" would.

SDA1C wrote: »

It has already been presented to mine own eyes on my T.V. Maybe when this (if this) DBT takes place we can also swap out the factory cable for the oppo with the one Pep made for me. if you don't SEE a difference in picture quality and HEAR a smother sound with less sibilance (sp?) then I will admit publicly,you are wrong.

I would be very interested to see this demonstrated, but it would definitely need to be done with a blind test. I really do hope we can make this DBT happen. Maybe we can both garner something from it!

As far as pulling enough juice....the manufacturer sends a cable with my amp commonly referred to as a donkey dick. Surely you aren't suggesting a multi-million dollar manufacturing company is also incorrect?

I'm betting that it is overkill. However, having a thicker cable than necessary isn't a bad thing, it just won't net you any advantage over a smaller cable that meets the requirements. I also question the gauge of wire they used since excessive insulation can make a cable thicker. I would also be curious to know how much power the unit actually consumes, as well as its fuse rating.

F1nut wrote: »

That must be why he arguably designs and builds some of the best pre amps on the market. His OTL amps are note worthy as well. Your opinions, not so much.

He may make excellent preamps, but that doesn't make his unfounded opinion on power cables any more credible.

PSOVLSK wrote: »

How can one who doesn't believe the cables will make a difference participate in such a test? Wouldn't you just say you hear no difference whether you did or not?

No. However, since you don't personally know me, I wouldn't expect you to have high expectations of me. However, I'm an honest person, and as such, would admit there was a difference if I did hear one.

F1nut

Wow, just wow. Could you possibly be a more closed minded, babbling fool. I don't know why I waited so long, but welcome to my BOZO list.

BeefJerky

DarqueKnight wrote: »

What do you know about the effects of electrical noise on signal integrity? Are you aware that most phenomena in electronics cannot be adequately explained by a simple application of Ohm's law? Why do you think electronics and circuit theory textbooks are so thick?

For starters, I have actually taken some electrical engineering courses. In addition, I consider electronics a hobby of mine, so I'd like to think I've learned a thing or two along the way. You are right that it isn't always straightforward. Also note that when I refer to power cords and digital audio cords, I specifically deny the claim of audibility. Yes, there may be minute difference, but I claim that they are not audible to the human ear.

A valid testing methodology uses test tools and procedures appropriate to the thing being tested. Why do you think DBT is a valid procedure for evaluating individual perceptions of a stereophonic sound field?

Simply put, it eliminates prejudices that would alter ones perception of the audio. If it is simply a person's expectations that are creating the perceived differences, then a DBT can filter those out. And, if the difference isn't actually audible, then it is purely an aesthetic difference. Since a stereophonic sound field only directly affects your auditory senses (except for certain deep bass notes), then that is the sense we need to concentrate on when testing. This also means we need to eliminate the other senses as well as expectations from the equation to confirm the audible difference, hence the DBT.

I am curious about the specific performance parameters you would evaluate in a DBT for power cords and how you would set up such a test.

You're making it more complicated that it needs to be. The statistics that I am initially interested in are to show whether or not there is even a difference. If we can demonstrate a difference, we can start testing for, and discussing, what they actually differences are, and also whether they are positive or negative.

I am not clear on how someone else proving that they can hear something will enhance your stereophonic pleasure. If someone proves unequivocally that they can hear something and you cannot hear the same thing under the same conditions, what value is that to you? In other words, if a benefit is proven to exist for 1000 people, yet you cannot perceive it, isn't that the same as the benefit not existing for you? DBT trials can prove that a particular medicine cured 10,000 people. You could take the same medicine and it not work for you.

As of now, I will not spend money or time on something like power cables or digital cables. There has been no reasonable proof that there is even a difference in terms of the audio. However, if there is something to back up the difference, I will at least try them out and see for myself.

As for your analogy to medical DBT trials, that isn't really a good comparison. However, since you brought it up, would you be likely to take a medicine that hasn't been DBT'd? Except for a few rare and specific diseases, I know I wouldn't risk it or waste my time. And, while there is no real risk (aside from financially) with testing PC's and digital audio cables, there is still the aspect of my time.

Electron flow through a conductor can be affected by conductor vibration. Are you aware that the resistance of a wire increases with temperature? What happens when temperature increases? The answer is that molecular vibration increases. Are you insisting that there is no causal relationship between mechanical vibration and electrical resistance?

It has been known for a long time that mechanical vibration can also cause electrical noise. This article published in the Journal of Applied Physics in the year 1952 is an example:

"Electrical Noise from Instrument Cables Subjected to Shock and Vibration"

Citation: Journal of Applied Physics, 23, 674, (1952).

You can find many other scholarly articles on the subject if you google "electrical noise vibration".

I am an audiophile and I just used the word "electron". Am I spectacularly wrong?

I realize this part wasn't directed at me, but I will still comment. Just because there may be a small difference in the power or digital signal, doesn't mean it will be audible. Again, audibility is what I am after.

Isn't it possible that a difference could exist, but a particular listener not be sensitive to it? Spatial representation is one of the primary performance parameters of stereo systems. However, stereophonic sound field perception is a psycho-acoustic phenomenon. It is an illusion.

Yes, there is a good chance that only certain listeners will be able to hear the difference. This will apply to nearly anything that would be considered a minute difference. However, if we can at least prove that some people can hear it, then I would consider it worthwhile to try. Until then, no.

Are you insisting that DBT is a particularly accurate method for evaluating psycho-acoustic illusions? If so, why?

When it comes to the audibility of audio components, yes. This is because the purpose of those components to recreate the audio. If cord A or box B doesn't actually make an audible difference, then we (and the retailers) should be honest about it. "No, this cable won't make your system sound different, but it does have beautiful aesthetics." And, that would be just fine by me. Aesthetics can play a part in choice of components; in my case, that would mainly be my speakers. However, honesty is the key.

This "challenge talk" reminds me of the countless people who used to challenge Bruce Lee to fight. Most of the time he would walk away or try to walk away. The "challenger" would then brag about how he "punked" Bruce Lee.

Not really sure how that applies here. However, I wouldn't have been one of those challengers. His skills were thoroughly proven and demonstrated, and I wouldn't have wanted to become critically injured by trying to show-off.

I have never run across a case of anyone saying that a power cord is better than an active or passive power line filter.

You should reread this thread then, since one poster here made exactly that claim.

Knowledgeable people know that a well engineered power cord is just one component in a comprehensive system of improving power quality for audio electronics. I use high performance power cords in conjunction with passive power filters, AC regenerators, audio grade fuses and dedicated AC circuits.

Okay, but I still question the audible differences of those "audio grade fuses" and power cords. However, the filters and dedicated circuits have genuine merit since they both serve to actually reduce or eliminate interference coming in via the power line.

There actually have been some noise studies done which proved that different power cables do have different electrical noise characteristics. Some people then said that the measured differences were not audible, but they did not provide reasons why the differences should be inaudible.

I don't see why those reasons would be necessary. If it isn't audible, that's really all there is to it.

I don't recall seeing a case of anyone here encouraging people to spend time and money on something that didn't work for them.

The issue I have is the lack of proof. Many recommended things at leave have some supporting evidence; power cables and digital audio cables do not.

I'm curious as to your reasons for requiring proof for something you are already convinced is worthless? Most people don't pay attention to, or want to test, things they believe to be a waste of time and money.

For me, curiosity. Plus, I don't mind being proven wrong. In fact, I would almost like to be proven wrong in this case. I'm open to new experiences, but don't typically just take someones word for it.

Do you have any knowledge of the transient power demands of electronic components, particularly power amps, when they are reproducing high dynamic range music?

Yes.

Thank you in advance for your attention to my inquiries.

You're welcome.