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

headrott

BeefJerky wrote: »

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.

You completely disregarded and sidestepped the point of my post BeefJerky. It doesn't matter if you are the 1st or 3,500th person to use "placebo" and the DBT concepts for stereophonic audio purposes, the point is they were never intended to be used for that purpose.

What I would like to know is: how would you know if we are deceiving ourselves by listening for differences in cables? If your answer is: because you cannot hear any difference in cables, then perhaps it's you who is deceiving yourself in to not hearing anything. That's just as plausible as the inverse isn't it? Right?

Greg

BeefJerky

headrott wrote: »

You completely disregarded and sidestepped the point of my post BeefJerky. It doesn't matter if you are the 1st or 3,500th person to use "placebo" and the DBT concepts for stereophonic audio purposes, the point is they were never intended to be used for that purpose.

Just because it wasn't originally intended for that purpose doesn't mean it is not useful for stereophonic audio purposes. Plain and simple. No one, not even DK, has really proven that it is not applicable or useful for audio.

What I would like to know is: how would you know if we are deceiving ourselves by listening for differences in cables? If your answer is: because you cannot hear any difference in cables, then perhaps it's you who is deceiving yourself in to not hearing anything. That's just as plausible as the inverse isn't it? Right?

Greg

Simply put, by not eliminating your expectations and other senses from the equation, you are not testing just the audibility of the cables. The goal of an audio system is auditory reproduction, am I correct? If so, then it is the audibility that should matter the most. Aesthetics can be important too, but if something doesn't have an audible affect, it shouldn't be sold with claims that it does; it should simply be sold for its aesthetic benefits.

BlueFox

He should be a politician. A lot of words with no substance.

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.

Of course there is proof. I posted a link, and there are others on the same site that show the difference in power cord performance. The problem is the facts do not fit your fantasy, so you ignore the data. The perfect example of being close minded.

Then there are the countless numbers of people who have actually heard differences with these cables. I guess they are all suffering from mass delusion. On the other hand, this isn't a religion asking you to have faith to believe in something. You can actually try it yourself, but being close minded you won't.

Of course, nobody really gives a **** whether you try something or not. It's your loss, not anyone else's.

So, keep on babbling. All you are accomplishing is to dig yourself deeper into the hole of absurdity and irrelevance, and are becoming an object to be mocked, ridiculed, and scorned.

BeefJerky

BlueFox wrote: »

He should be a politician. A lot of words with no substance.

Of course there is proof. I posted a link, and there are others on the same site that show the difference in power cord performance. The problem is the facts do not fit your fantasy, so you ignore the data. The perfect example of being close minded.

You offered zero proof that would counter my claim of audibility. I pointed out the numerous flaws in your link, and you still have yet to address a single one. I'm not ignoring the data, it's just that it doesn't actually conflict with my claims.

Then there are the countless numbers of people who have actually heard differences with these cables. I guess they are all suffering from mass delusion. On the other hand, this isn't a religion asking you to have faith to believe in something. You can actually try it yourself, but being close minded you won't.

The placebo effect is quite common in humans. There are ways to avoid that and show whether or not there are real audible differences, it's just that most of the power cable and digital cable preachers refuse to participate.

Of course, nobody really gives a **** whether you try something or not. It's your loss, not anyone else's.

Good to hear. :cheesygrin:

So, keep on babbling. All you are accomplishing is to dig yourself deeper into the hole of absurdity and irrelevance, and are becoming an object to be mocked, ridiculed, and scorned.

I intend to continue defending my point of view, and pushing for real proof. Besides, I like a good debate. As far as an object of mockery and scorn, it's about time. Now I feel like I'm a real Polkie! :razz:

headrott

BeefJerky wrote: »

Just because it wasn't originally intended for that purpose doesn't mean it is not useful for stereophonic audio purposes. Plain and simple. No one, not even DK, has really proven that it is not applicable or useful for audio.

Ok, but no one has proven that DBT's are useful in testing stereophonic reproduction (let alone specific components in stereophonic reproduction), correct? So, since DBT's were originally intended for another purpose besides stereophonic audio how does the lack of proof showing it should or shouldn't be used for that purpose somehow make using the DBT valid for it? It seems to me there is absolutely more evidence against using the DBT for stereophonic reproduction.

I don't think you actually absorbed and meditated on Ray's DBT and ABX testing thread. Try reading it a couple more times and then meditate on what you read.

BeefJerky wrote: »

Simply put, by not eliminating your expectations and other senses from the equation, you are not testing just the audibility of the cables. The goal of an audio system is auditory reproduction, am I correct? If so, then it is the audibility that should matter the most. Aesthetics can be important too, but if something doesn't have an audible affect, it shouldn't be sold with claims that it does; it should simply be sold for its aesthetic benefits.

You really are sidestepping my questions BeefJerky. Try reading this again and actually answer the question:

headrott wrote: »

What I would like to know is: how would you know if we are deceiving ourselves by listening for differences in cables? If your answer is: because you cannot hear any difference in cables, then perhaps it's you who is deceiving yourself in to not hearing anything. That's just as plausible as the inverse isn't it? Right?

Greg

BeefJerky

headrott wrote: »

Ok, but no one has proven that DBT's are useful in testing stereophonic reproduction (let alone specific components in stereophonic reproduction), correct? So, since DBT's were originally intended for another purpose besides stereophonic audio how does the lack of proof showing it should or shouldn't be used for that purpose somehow make using the DBT valid for it? It seems to me there is absolutely more evidence against using the DBT for stereophonic reproduction.

I don't think you actually absorbed and meditated on Ray's DBT and ABX testing thread. Try reading it a couple more times and then meditate on what you read.

I have read it...thoroughly. However, his claims against it are mostly based on opinion and not fact. The only parts that he really has solid evidence against are poor testing methodologies. This primarily includes inadequate listening time and poor level matching, both of which I agree with. However, he offers no solid evidence against a properly done DBT/ABX. As for your claims that there is more evidence against using DBT/ABX for audio, I doubt it. Either way, it's the best testing methodology we have right now, so I'm in favor of it.

You really are sidestepping my questions BeefJerky. Try reading this again and actually answer the question

First off, I don't know whether you are deceiving yourselves, but then, neither do you. Since humans are prone to the "placebo effect" (and that includes both you and me), you need to use a proper testing method to accurately test. Without putting your prejudices and expectations out of the picture, your claims simply have no real standing and certainly no scientific value.

In addition, you're assuming incorrectly as to my answer: "If your answer is: because you cannot hear any difference in cables, then perhaps it's you who is deceiving yourself in to not hearing anything."
I never claimed either way, nor will I since I have not desire to try them without some sort of solid evidence that they can make a difference.

headrott

BeefJerky wrote: »

I have read it...thoroughly. However, his claims against it are mostly based on opinion and not fact. The only parts that he really has solid evidence against are poor testing methodologies. This primarily includes inadequate listening time and poor level matching, both of which I agree with. However, he offers no solid evidence against a properly done DBT/ABX. As for your claims that there is more evidence against using DBT/ABX for audio, I doubt it. Either way, it's the best testing methodology we have right now, so I'm in favor of it.

I think that answer speaks for itself.......

BeefJerky wrote: »

First off, I don't know whether you are deceiving yourselves, but then, neither do you. Since humans are prone to the "placebo effect" (and that includes both you and me), you need to use a proper testing method to accurately test. Without putting your prejudices and expectations out of the picture, your claims simply have no real standing and certainly no scientific value.

In addition, you're assuming incorrectly as to my answer: "If your answer is: because you cannot hear any difference in cables, then perhaps it's you who is deceiving yourself in to not hearing anything."
I never claimed either way, nor will I since I have not desire to try them without some sort of solid evidence that they can make a difference.

Again I don't believe "placebo effect" is applicable for sterephonic audio as it was intended for medical evaluations. It's similar to DBT's and their application for stereophonic audio. The term placebo is used for a false medication given to the patient receiving the placebo the idea that they were receiving the true medication. Since cables either do or do not make an audible difference there is not necessarily a secondary "false cable" (or placebo) to test if there is an audible difference between two cables, the term does not apply to a stereophonic audio situation (and that has been my point all along). You cannot assume that there is no audible difference because you don't think there is. Where is your proof that there is no audible difference? As you stated, you won't even try cables until you are shown proof there is a difference in them. You don't know if there is a difference or not as you have not discovered for yourself if there is one or not. As a mater of fact, you are refusing to until there is proof there is one. Do you see the illogical circular argument that makes?

Greg

tonyb

LOL...." The Gospel of Jerky "
So it shall be written, so it shall be done.

One has to wonder if some join an audio forum to further their interest in audio or to just spread their Gospel.

halo71

tonyb wrote: »

LOL...." The Gospel of Jerky "
So it shall be written, so it shall be done.

One has to wonder if some join an audio forum to further their interest in audio or to just spread their Gospel.

+1 As Al Bundy said...."So it is, so it shall be".....

He said "As of now, I will not spend money or time on something like power cables or digital cables." But he is hell bent on trying to convince others of his logic. Why waste time arguing and posting in this thread. Most logical people would reconsider their position when almost everyone around them is trying to teach them something. I mean, if you don't believe something that is fine. But why waste energy trying to convince others of it? Reminds me of them folks that like to knock on your door early on Sunday morning and talk to ya. :rolleyes:

halo71

WilliamM2 wrote: »

That you will believe in absolutely anything? Not surprising.

Totally irrelevant to what I was getting at. I am not the one arguing the fact of what is being talked about in recent posts. Re-read the 1st post! :rolleyes:

tonyb

You guys do realize this thread is going nowhere....quick ?

I can go along with those who fall into the catagory of " I have to hear it to believe it." It's kinda like those who say I have to see it to believe it. Ghosts....as an example, no matter what you say, someone has to see that one to believe it. God is another, nobody can actually prove his existence, yet billions of people believe God to be fact. True or not, the constant in all of this, wether you need to see it to believe it, or hear it to believe it, is obviously experiencing it for yourself. Same with audio, sure myths exist in audio, as they do in real life.....like Bigfoot, but untill you at least try to experience all audio has to offer, you'll never know for sure.

My problem with the naysayers are that they don't at least try to experience different gear, cables, tweeks. Yet want to claim their opinion as somehow valid. To some, everything needs to be black and white, but it's those grey area's that discovery is made in, and not just audio either. Explore the grey area's in this hobby of ours, discovery is pretty cool when it happens, even not discovering anything puts your mind at ease. An old saying applies...."Nothing ventured, nothing gained."

heiney9

headrott wrote: »

You really are sidestepping my questions BeefJerky. Try reading this again and actually answer the question:

Greg

That's what he does best. Babble, babble.

H9

BeefJerky

headrott wrote: »

I think that answer speaks for itself.......

Again I don't believe "placebo effect" is applicable for sterephonic audio as it was intended for medical evaluations. It's similar to DBT's and their application for stereophonic audio. The term placebo is used for a false medication given to the patient receiving the placebo the idea that they were receiving the true medication. Since cables either do or do not make an audible difference there is not necessarily a secondary "false cable" (or placebo) to test if there is an audible difference between two cables, the term does not apply to a stereophonic audio situation (and that has been my point all along). You cannot assume that there is no audible difference because you don't think there is. Where is your proof that there is no audible difference? As you stated, you won't even try cables until you are shown proof there is a difference in them. You don't know if there is a difference or not as you have not discovered for yourself if there is one or not. As a mater of fact, you are refusing to until there is proof there is one. Do you see the illogical circular argument that makes?

Greg

Okay, I think I see the real issue here. You and I shouldn't even be discussing DBT/ABX at this time since you claim you don't even believe in the "placebo effect" when it comes to audio. However, it does appear that you believe it when it comes to medicinal purposes. So, just to clarify and make sure we are on the same page:
You do believe that the use of placebo is necessary in medicinal testing due the placebo effect. Specifically, there are cases where the brain/body can heal itself of disease, or even create disease based on expectations. Yet, you don't believe that your brain can alter your perception of hearing due to expectations or input from other senses. Really???

On the other hand, if your problem is more with my choice of term, I'm sure we can come up with something more to your liking. I'll admit that it may not be an optimal term for describing the effects of expectation upon one's perception of auditory stimuli. Nonetheless, it is used because it is referring the same affect of the patients body altering itself or its perception based on expectations. As of now, I haven't found a better term, but I'm certainly open to suggestions!

As for me assuming that there is no audible difference, you are correct in this case. There simply is no scientific evidence supporting the claims of power cable and digital cable enthusiasts. Really, there is no proof either way! An ABX/DBT could provide some evidence for or against my claims, just as has been done with other types of audio equipment. If I do test different cables, I actually would prefer to do it ABX or DBT style in an effort to abate my own expectations. It seems that one power cable believer is willing to join me in such a trial, and I hope others might as well. If a test does prove differences in power/digital audio cables, I am prepared to admit that my assumptions and expectations were wrong.

heiney9

Wow, beef now not only do you know everything about audio after a few electrical engineering classes, but now you know how the human mind interacts to heal the body. You are OUR modern day Einstein. Why are you wasting your time and talent on the Polk Audio board?

H9

BeefJerky

heiney9 wrote: »

Wow, beef now not only do you know everything about audio after a few electrical engineering classes, but now you know how the human mind interacts to heal the body. You are OUR modern day Einstein. Why are you wasting your time and talent on the Polk Audio board?

H9

Probably the same reason you don't put your incredible talents of wit and sarcasm to use and join the standup circuit.

heiney9

I have one question for BeefJerky. He will probably side step it, talk around it, etc as has been his practice. But here it goes.

How does it benefit you personally if I can prove to you I hear a difference? What benefit do you get? Is it about being 100% right? Don't tell me it's so you will then go out and try it for yourself. Because you can try it for yourself now without me. What makes me so special that if I proved to you I can hear a difference that you would automatically go and buy better cables to try for yourself? Why don't you do that on your own if you are so open minded? What harm will it do to try it for yourself? Certainly you have a little bit of time and money to set aside since these discussion seem to have a very high priority in your life. You seem to be well invested in your POV so why not put us all in our place by actually trying it and coming back with atleast an opinion based on REAL experience. You are not qualified nor do you have the credentials and experience to be taken seriously.

H9

P.s. I fully expect you to side step every question and redirect them into something abstract rather than methodically answering them. I don't believe you are capable of methodically answering them with a rational perspective. They are legitimate questions that I would like you to answer. They are not trick questions, real legitimate questions that any logical person would ask of you.

BeefJerky

heiney9 wrote: »

I have one question for BeefJerky. He will probably side step it, talk around it, etc as has been his practice. But here it goes.

I will answer each question individually for you, so that I (hopefully) do not get lambasted.

How does it benefit you personally if I can prove to you I hear a difference?

To a large extent it is about curiosity. I tend to have a scientific point of view about things, so proper scientific evidence is important to me. So, your proof would actually satisfy my scientific sense and make me more interested in pursuing that particular road. Though, this doesn't apply to you specifically, but anyone who is a power cord believer.

What benefit do you get?

Learning. But, I prefer to learn more based on scientific evidence and not just hearsay.

Is it about being 100% right?

I don't care which party is right or wrong. If I'm wrong, so be it. It will still be a learning experience for myself and others.

Don't tell me it's so you will then go out and try it for yourself.

I would. However, I would also want to personally participate in any sort of DBT/ABX study we do, because I want to test them with my ears and without my own perceived expectations.

Because you can try it for yourself now without me.

I would want to do a scientific study even for myself, but as I explain below, that really isn't feasible. In the meantime, I prefer to spend my money on proven upgrades. Right now, that doesn't include power cables or digital audio cables.

What makes me so special that if I proved to you I can hear a difference that you would automatically go and buy better cables to try for yourself?

It means that they actually make an audible difference. Even if its subtle to the point where not everyone could hear it, at least there would be evidence of a difference. With that evidence, I would be willing to spend money on those cables.

Why don't you do that on your own if you are so open minded?

Simply put, I don't have any friends or family who cares enough about audio to want to put together an ABX/DBT with me. And, as I said before, I want to abate my own expectations in the study, so simply swapping them myself isn't an option. That's why I'd like to get together with some fellow audio enthusiasts to do this properly.

What harm will it do to try it for yourself?

I've already mentioned my two limiting factors above: money management and lack of interest from friends and family. Not sure what I else I can say on this.

Certainly you have a little bit of time and money to set aside since these discussion seem to have a very high priority in your life.

Time? Yes. However, my money has other priorities right now. That's not to say I don't have any set aside for audio, but I would prefer to spend it on proven upgrades. The exception would be if I could get a real study together, and I've already mentioned why that isn't feasible on my own.

You seem to be well invested in your POV so why not put us all in our place by actually trying it and coming back with atleast an opinion based on REAL experience.

Again, I'd love to, but I don't want my own expectations influencing it, so a proper study would be needed for me as well.

You are not qualified nor do you have the credentials and experience to be taken seriously.

And yet you think you are. Sorry, but without real scientific evidence your claims aren't any more valid then mine.

P.s. I fully expect you to side step every question and redirect them into something abstract rather than methodically answering them. I don't believe you are capable of methodically answering them with a rational perspective. They are legitimate questions that I would like you to answer. They are not trick questions, real legitimate questions that any logical person would ask of you.

I hope I answered your questions adequately. However, if you desire further clarification, please ask, and I will do my best to provide to explain further.

thsmith

RICK !

We need some pie !

Toolfan66

What a lot of wasted energy on scientific babble, It's just audio not brain surgery..

If liking science is being so closed minded then you can have it. BTW Jesus told me cables matter and that Darwin was full of it..








Sarcasim again Beef so don't take it so serious...

heiney9

So in a nutshell your curious, but not curious enough to try it for yourself. And you can't or aren't willing to trust yourself so you need others to participate and demonstrate they can hear a difference and then that means you will hear a difference. We have a cable program that is essentially free to participate in, but apparently $30 for shipping is too much for you to participate. Also, you are correct, if you are so insecure to try this on your own because you are afraid your expectations will have undue influence then you should probably just walk away from this hobby.

If you have a wife or girlfriend, I'd sure hate to see the torture you put yourself through choosing her, you know, with all your expectations and biases. Did you have someone else date her, get intimate with her to prove to you she was the one.............sorry that is a flippant response that doesn't need an answer.

Thank you for answering the questions, but to me it's bologney, but I respect that it's your bologney and somehow, someway your responses make sense to you, even though I can't say the same.

Sorry, but without real scientific evidence your claims aren't any more valid then mine.

Finally, nail, hammer, head.........except I am relating my actual experiences, you are just basing your opinion on unfounded speculation. In my world someone who actually gives it some actual effort is more relevent in my book. And you are WAY more adamant about your opinion being a CERTAIN FACT than I am. It is factual for me based on my experiences and efforts in this hobby as it relates to my listening habits. Believe it or don't, but atleast be rational enough to determine it on YOUR OWN.

H9

heiney9

Also beefjerky, you say you want to spend your audio $$$ on proven upgrades? What would "proven" upgrades be? I'm curious since just about everything in this hobby is subjective, what scientific proof can you come up with to justify an upgrade? Yes, it is a trick question, so be careful.

H9

halo71

thsmith wrote: »

RICK !

We need some pie !

Since he is not here right now. :cheesygrin:

BeefJerky

heiney9 wrote: »

So in a nutshell your curious, but not curious enough to try it for yourself. And you can't or aren't willing to trust yourself so you need others to participate and demonstrate they can hear a difference and then that means you will hear a difference. We have a cable program that is essentially free to participate in, but apparently $30 for shipping is too much for you to participate. Also, you are correct, if you are so insecure to try this on your own because you are afraid your expectations will have undue influence then you should probably just walk away from this hobby.

You are right, I don't trust my expectations to magically go away when I test cables for differences. I am seriously interested in testing them, but unless done properly and scientifically, I will not pursue it. As for walking away from this hobby? I think that's not only harsh, but illogical. My preference to stick to things with real proven differences shouldn't exclude me from this hobby. There are still things to try that clearly fall into that category.

Thank you for answering the questions, but to me it's bologney, but I respect that it's your bologney and somehow, someway your responses make sense to you, even though I can't say the same.

That's fine. Different people approach things in different ways, and that is okay. However, I do love a good bologna and liverwurst sandwich, yum!

Finally, nail, hammer, head.........except I am relating my actual experiences, you are just basing your opinion on unfounded speculation. In my world someone who actually gives it some actual effort is more relevent in my book. And you are WAY more adamant about your opinion being a CERTAIN FACT than I am. It is factual for me based on my experiences and efforts in this hobby as it relates to my listening habits. Believe it or don't, but atleast be rational enough to determine it on YOUR OWN.

Well, this just boils down to our differences in thinking. I want actual proof, and you don't require it. As for determining on my own, I've already made my statements regarding how I would want it done, and the feasibility of it.

heiney9 wrote: »

Also beefjerky, you say you want to spend your audio $$$ on proven upgrades? What would "proven" upgrades be? I'm curious since just about everything in this hobby is subjective, what scientific proof can you come up with to justify an upgrade? Yes, it is a trick question, so be careful.

First, I probably used a poor choice of words in my above post, so let me clarify. I do not want to spend my money on something unless there is a proven difference. Upgrade is a more tricky term to define since personal preference comes into play.

A proven change to me is something that can be demonstrated scientifically. It can be via appropriate measurements, or via proper blind testing. Note that when it comes to audio, the scientific aspect (for me) is primarily in proving whether there is a difference or not.

Once a difference is proven, the matter of upgrade or not can be tricky. Let's take speakers for example, Polk RTi's versus LSi's. There are clear and proven differences between these two series, but whether one would be an upgrade over another would be down to personal preference. For instance, I love the sound of the LSi's, but find RTi's to sound like nails on a chalkboard for music. Some feel the LSI's are too laid back, and prefer the RTi's. And, this is where it gets tricky. I try not to claim fact or ask for evidence when it comes down to preference of one over another. The scientific aspect is more in proving whether or not there actually is a difference.

heiney9

How is there a proven difference between the LSi and RTi? Who has proven it and by what method? Darqueknight showed a proven difference in power cables and power distribution, yet that wasn't good enough for you. Why is a graph of frequency response in a controlled environment between two speakers good enough proof, but what Raife demonstrated isn't? Or is it because you CAN ACTULLY hear the differences between the speakers? But then how can you trust your perceptions because they weren't done in an ABX test with others present to help you determine the differences you were hearing actually exist?

Why are you willing and able to listen to speakers and hear a difference, but not willing to listen to things like cables to see if you hear a difference? Just because one speaker measures differently than another doesn't allow you to reasonably infer one will sound better to you in your rig in your environment. You had to listen to each of them to decide? Right? But you won't extend that rational and reasonable application to other components in this hobby? Because you have already made your mind up. The same scientific evidence to support differences between speakers is around for cables, but you actually have to listen to the cables to determine which you prefer, right? Or is that too logical?

You mention personal preference, isn't that completely against your needing scientific proof something sounds different and not by prefering one over the other by listening?

heiney9

BeefJerky wrote: »

Well, this just boils down to our differences in thinking. I want actual proof, and you don't require it. As for determining on my own, I've already made my statements regarding how I would want it done, and the feasibility of it.

My proof is what my ears and brain tell me I'm hearing. I would in no way, shape or form allow someone else or some methodology prove something like that for me. I am in it for me and what I experience in my rig, with my ears, with my music, in my environment. I am sorry you can't do the same and get the same type of enjoyment I get from it.

BeefJerky wrote: »

First, I probably used a poor choice of words in my above post, so let me clarify. I do not want to spend my money on something unless there is a proven difference. Upgrade is a more tricky term to define since personal preference comes into play.

A proven change to me is something that can be demonstrated scientifically. It can be via appropriate measurements, or via proper blind testing. Note that when it comes to audio, the scientific aspect (for me) is primarily in proving whether there is a difference or not.

So how do you correlate "appropriate measurements" equate to a positive change? So if you hate the way a cdp ultimately sounds, but because it's manufacturer's specs says it measures the best and a group of scientific types conduct a proper blind test and determine it's the best choice, then you would live with it because it must be good? Or would you determine after listening you didn't prefer it?

H9

BeefJerky

heiney9 wrote: »

How is there a proven difference between the LSi and RTi? Who has proven it and by what method? Darqueknight showed a proven difference in power cables and power distribution, yet that wasn't good enough for you. Why is a graph of frequency response in a controlled environment between two speakers good enough proof, but what Raife demonstrated isn't? Or is it because you CAN ACTULLY hear the differences between the speakers? But then how can you trust your perceptions because they weren't done in an ABX test with others present to help you determine the differences you were hearing actually exist?

Measurements of acoustical differences in speakers are scientific enough for me to prove that there is a difference.

As far as DK's measurements on power cords, the post I saw regarding his power cable tests doesn't go against my claims in any way. He certainly tested the difference between the cables, and showed that there is a difference. However, that difference doesn't necessarily equate to audible differences in the final output. Unless there was some other post by him that actually does test the audibility, his tests don't help your case, nor does it hurt mine.

Why are you willing and able to listen to speakers and hear a difference, but not willing to listen to things like cables to see if you hear a difference? Just because one speaker measures differently than another doesn't allow you to reasonably infer one will sound better to you in your rig in your environment. You had to listen to each of them to decide? Right? But you won't extend that rational and reasonable application to other components in this hobby? Because you have already made your mind up. The same scientific evidence to support differences between speakers is around for cables, but you actually have to listen to the cables to determine which you prefer, right? Or is that too logical?

But, you've already admitted that there are measurements that show differences between the speakers. Once again, that satisfies my desire for scientific evidence of differences. However, you are right that the measurements don't indicate which will sound better in a particular environment, or how it will suit one's individual preference; it only shows a difference, and nothing more. I'm quite sure that I never claimed otherwise.

You mention personal preference, isn't that completely against your needing scientific proof something sounds different and not by prefering one over the other by listening?

To me there is a distinction between demonstration of difference, and how the difference actually presents itself in the world of audio. I suppose that to some extent that may not make sense to others, but it does to me. I'm not sure I can really come up with another way to explain it.

BeefJerky

heiney9 wrote: »

My proof is what my ears and brain tell me I'm hearing. I would in no way, shape or form allow someone else or some methodology prove something like that for me. I am in it for me and what I experience in my rig, with my ears, with my music, in my environment. I am sorry you can't do the same and get the same type of enjoyment I get from it.

That is fine. However, to assume that I don't get great enjoyment from my audio hobby is fallacious and without merit.

So how do you correlate "appropriate measurements" equate to a positive change?

I don't. I've already clearly stated the scientific measurements are used to provide evidence of difference to me, and that is it.

So if you hate the way a cdp ultimately sounds, but because it's manufacturer's specs says it measures the best and a group of scientific types conduct a proper blind test and determine it's the best choice, then you would live with it because it must be good? Or would you determine after listening you didn't prefer it?

I would determine it myself as I have already stated multiple times. The scientific aspect is only to prove whether or not there is a difference for me; after that it becomes subjective.

maximillian

I don't buy really* expensive cables because I can't typically hear a "night and day" difference. Now, whether it's my ears are full of goo, my system isn't good enough, or the cable simply isn't adding anything isn't that important. The real reason I don't have expensive cables is because I'm a cheap bas%^#d. Admit it, you know who you are. :cheesygrin:

*really expensive is relative. Most of my cabling is less expensive Signal Cable and MIT cables.

ALL cables and even bulk wire have resistance, capacitance, and inductance. They are basically an impedance network. Even though you're not passing RF the signals are still fairly HF, and for speaker and power cables there are dynamic high currents involved. Then throw in that there's a variety of sources and signal loads each with different source and load impedance. You can then see that cables can't be simply excused as not having an impact. Besides, there's been tests that show otherwise.

OK fine... you don't want to spend the money... at the very least spend a little more money on slightly better cabling that looks far better than crap-shack stuff.

heiney9

How would you know if there was an audible difference between cables, if you never listened to different cables? Why is the scientific measurement between speakers enough to convince there is an audible difference, but the EXACT same proof for cables isn't?

I can answer that for you, because you listened to the speakers in question and determined not only there was a difference, but then chose which one you prefered. You haven't done the same for cables.

You can't have it both ways. You can't ask for scientific evidence for both scenarios and arbitrarily dismiss one over the other when in the end you have to use your ears to determine which you prefer, because according to the measurements of both scenario's there is a measured difference. You are the definition of closed mindedness.

I would even go on to furthur assume that you didn't even engage in a blind ABX test to determine if the speakers did in fact sound different and not let your biases and self professed insecurities influence your perceptions.

Your whole scenario demonstrates an extreme bias you have as well as making correlations based on unscientific methods. The same methods you so stringently want others to follow but are unwilling to follow yourself or only when it's convenient for you.

H9

BeefJerky

maximillian wrote: »

I don't buy really* expensive cables because I can't typically hear a "night and day" difference. Now, whether it's my ears are full of goo, my system isn't good enough, or the cable simply isn't adding anything isn't that important. The real reason I don't have expensive cables is because I'm a cheap bas%^#d. Admit it, you know who you are. :cheesygrin:

To some extent, yes. There is no doubt that I like to get good deals, and sometimes I'm willing to wait to do so. I got some incredible deals on the LSi speakers that I have now via various sources, including here. However, depending on what I want, and how much I desire it, I don't necessarily have a problem paying for it. I recently paid out the wazoo for my Onkyo TX-NR1009 because it had the feature set I wanted, plenty of power to power my 4 surrounds off its internal amp (the front stage is powered via ext amps), and I like Onkyo, as well as the look of this beast. It has more than lived up to my expectations, too.

*really expensive is relative. Most of my cabling is less expensive Signal Cable and MIT cables.

True. My expensive to me Onkyo receiver may be pocket change for others.

ALL cables and even bulk wire have resistance, capacitance, and inductance. They are basically an impedance network. Even though you're not passing RF the signals are still fairly HF, and for speaker and power cables there are dynamic high currents involved. Then throw in that there's a variety of sources and signal loads each with different source and load impedance. You can then see that cables can't be simply excused as not having an impact. Besides, there's been tests that show otherwise.

Except that I'm primarily arguing against the differences from power cables and digital cables. I am not denying the existence of differences when it comes to analog interconnects or speaker cables. This is simply due to the difference between analog and digital, as well as the isolation that a proper power supply will have.