Five Speaker Jumper Comparisons For The SDA SRS 1.2TL

DarqueKnight

Mr. Bubbles wrote: »

My thought would be like Face; no jumper should be better; 1 less item/ point to introduce any artifacts.

On3s&Z3r0s wrote: »

It sounds like DK's setup is the amp connected to the LF posts which are jumpered with silver wire into HF posts, and that sounds better than wiring HF and LF to the same signal input directly. That is super counter-intuitive, but who knows... it seems like people generally characterize silver as sharpening highs at the potential expense of deadening the lows, so this would seem to be a particularly good application for sliver jumpers.

It does seem counter-intuitive that a jumpered connection might sound better than a directly soldered one. However, there is more to wire than just the wire. Wire can be milled in one direction and have better conductivity and lower noise in one direction than the other. Since most of the current travels on the surface of a conductor, polishing the surface can also reduce noise. The type of insulation used also has an effect on noise performance. Insulation has dielectric properties and can absorb and release energy into the signal. Termination quality is a commonly overlooked and vital component in cable noise reduction. Soldered connections are electrically noisier than pressure welded connections. Solid core litz wire exhibits less noise than stranded wire due to the absence of strand interaction.

In my case, I replaced a stranded wire, soldered connection between HF and LF binding posts with a solid core wire, non-soldered connection.

On3s&Z3r0s wrote: »

I recently re-read another of DK's posts from a while back saying that using a silver lead (from a Dueland resistor, I think) as a jumper on a crossover PCB made a noticeable improvement over a tinned copper jumper. So, if these are auditory hallucinations, at least they are consistent auditory hallucinations. :biggrin: (To be abundantly clear, I don't think they are hallucinations.)

I guess the key takeaway is start looking for places to insert silver into your signal path.

I caution against a blanket statement that a cable made of silver is always better than one made of copper. I have heard some unpleasant sounding silver cables. Silver is 5% more conductive than copper, but silver's conductivity advantage can be met by making a copper conductor 5% bigger. Again, attention must be paid to how a cable is constructed and terminated rather than just focusing on the type of metal conductor material.

DarqueKnight

teekay0007 wrote: »

I sometimes forget that most of these "discussions" and "debates" are only for those who agree with some of you and your points of view. Everyone else is just a troll! How silly.

I always welcome different viewpoints, provided they are based on reason.

teekay0007 wrote: »

I'm far from ignorant, but for the life of me, I can't figure out why so many of you are so very dead set against picking which jumper or speaker cable sounds the best to your own ears in your own home in your own rig unless you know which one is in place for each listening session. All I can come up with is that you're afraid that that "upgrade" that you just made with its huge price tag would not have been the one you would have preferred without that information.

For the life of me, I can't get anyone in the DBT/Null Test crowd to explain why blind tests should be used for scenarios for which they were not designed. I also can't get anyone to explain why, since bias are such powerful mindbenders, the concept of the "debiased consumer" is an established research topic in the field of economics.

teekay0007 wrote: »

COMMON SENSE tells me that I can listen to some of my own music that I've heard a gazillion times before and compare it to repeated samples with a simple change out of jumpers/cables and pick out the one that sounds best TO ME, even without knowing which piece of wire is in play. The day I'll accept the notion that I need to be educated and trained on how to listen to what I like to hear in my music, so I will know which one of several samples I enjoy more, or can tell which one is "actually" better, is a day that will never come.

I thought that one aspect of "training" was doing something over and over again until you become proficient at it. Haven't your ears become trained by listening to the same music over and over again? You don't have to go to a formal school to become an expert marksman. You can just buy a gun, go to a safe area and practice shooting.

You are not one of those people who thinks training and education can only occur in a classroom are you?

Since you are so adept at picking out sonic changes in your system, are you saying that if you knew which cable or jumper you were listening to, your gazillion hours of listening experience would be nullified? Are you saying that you would be unduly influenced by the price, brand and appearance of an item and that those things, rather than what you hear, would have more influence on your performance evaluation?

If I put in one cable and hear the percussion two feet to the right of the right speaker, then with another cable the percussion is directly in front of the right speaker, how is knowing which cable is in use going to influence my spatial perception?

If I put in one cable and hear more sustain and decay on piano notes, then with another cable the sustain and decay is truncated, how is knowing which cable is in use going to influence my ability to hear harmonics and fine detail?

Hermitism

I have a question before this thread dies. So many of these threads have reviews and observations based on having a "trained ear". I fully admit before joining this forum that I had no idea that you could actually hear the sound stage if you sit still and just concentrate on the music. I've taken advice from this forum; i.e., speaker placement, trying different speaker cables, acoustic panels, applying Dynamat and I am able to hear a difference. But how does one go about training their ears to hear the subtle difference that a lot of you speak of? I'm sure a lot of you that have been in this hobby for years can pick out changes in sound that I would not be able to. How did you get to that point to where you can pick up on "slight" changes? This might be why some people say that cables don't matter, because they don't know how to listen. It was never the norm for me to sit still while listening to music, it was more like background music, until I joined here. Is it just that some people have more sensitive hearing than others or is there a way to actually learn how to pick up on the most subtle changes in music?

Moose68Bash

Hermitism wrote: »

I have a question before this thread dies. So many of these threads have reviews and observations based on having a "trained ear". I fully admit before joining this forum that I had no idea that you could actually hear the sound stage if you sit still and just concentrate on the music. I've taken advice from this forum; i.e., speaker placement, trying different speaker cables, acoustic panels, applying Dynamat and I am able to hear a difference. But how does one go about training their ears to hear the subtle difference that a lot of you speak of? I'm sure a lot of you that have been in this hobby for years can pick out changes in sound that I would not be able to. How did you get to that point to where you can pick up on "slight" changes? This might be why some people say that cables don't matter, because they don't know how to listen. It was never the norm for me to sit still while listening to music, it was more like background music, until I joined here. Is it just that some people have more sensitive hearing than others or is there a way to actually learn how to pick up on the most subtle changes in music?

Like most -- no ALL - of DK's threads, this one provokes thought and helps educate us all -- except those who do not care to learn.

I've been reading this thread since its inception, nd I've learned a lot. I've also been ruminating over a point very similar to the one Hermitism raises and which DK has noted time and again in this thread -- people can learn to listen. Those of us who want to talk intelligently about our subjective listening experiences must learn not only to listen critically, but also to describe what we hear in terms that communicate effectively with others. In other words, we need a "critical vocabulary" that we all understand and share. This becomes the subjective equivalent of the kinds of empirical data that DK uses and present so effectively to explain and justify his analyses. He also is a master of both critical listening and critical writing about what he hears subjectively. A lot of the nonsense that he so patiently rebuts -- in the manner of a master teacher -- reflects his ability to express his analyses in his threads.

My education is in criticism of English literature, and while I was teaching and writing about literature, I struggled to develop a vocabulary to convey my critical approach to others interested in the theory and criticism of prose fiction. since turning to this hobby, I've been struggling to learn and apply a critical vocabulary to my listening experiences so that I can convey them intelligibly to my colleagues on this forum. Criticism of music or any subject is an "interactive" process -- that is, you observe something that you must find terms to describe; then, after you learn terms to describe phenomena, you are able to discern them, even though they were there all the time.

I hope this is not too confusing, and I am not trying to hijack DK's remarkable thread. If that is what this appears to be, I apologize, and please ignore this rambling. With that said, I would like to lay out for discussion and comment a rough cut at some structure and vocabulary for characterizing our listening experiences.These are outlined in "Categories" (1-4) and "Characteristics" within categories (a-x).

1. Dynamics
a. Speed of transients
b. Delivery of Transients without Loss of Definition Regardless of Source – e.g., Solo, Ensemble,
Full Orchestra – and Regardless of Volume Level
c. Impression of Strain (or Absence of Strain) with Challenging Passages
d. Handling of Reproduction across Full Frequency Range

2. Definition
a. Voices of different sources (vocals, instruments) are clear and distinct
b. Modulations of sources are clear and distinct
c. Realism and verisimilitude of rendering
d. Complexity of source accurately reproduced

3. Timbre
a. Richness
b. Coherence
c. Neutrality (Naturalness/Accuracy/Without Coloration)
d. Nuanced
e. Clarity

4. Spatialization
a. Image
b. Size, Dimensions, Three-Dimensionality
c. Placement of Sources of Sound within Image
d. Precision Compared to Live Performance
e. Stability
f. Openness and “Airiness” (separation of sources on sound stage)

txcoastal1

What leads to the cable debate is not which sounds better or worse it's when someone tries to say there is no difference at all that's when the crap hits the fan.

Last year 4 of us gathered in a room testing headphones 3 picked one I picked the other, it's what I liked no debate just an opinion.

I happen to like a pair of speaker cables in my rig and can swear by them. Let Skip borrow them a few minutes later in his rig and they sounded bad. We liked them in mine but it was very noticeable that they didn't sound well in his.

Teekay some times I wish I didn't get into the critical listening part of the hobby but either way I enjoy it. Some care to a certain extent and some of us are radicals just like in any hobby, not a bad thing. Look how radical art enthusiasts are paying millions for splattered paint or a photograph of a mountain.

Hermitism

DSkip wrote: »

Get your ears on a bunch of systems. Ask people while listening to systems what it does well and what it doesn't do well. If you want to train your ears, the easiest way to do it is to join a local audio society or attend some of the get-togethers and just listen to the experienced folk talk about it all.

You're going to make fun of me for this, but I've purposely tried to stay away from listening to high end audio systems. I haven't walked in a high end audio store. I have such an obsessive/compulsive personality when it comes to hobbies. When I got into scuba diving, and had to buy every piece of equipment, every accessory. I'm an avid fan of shooting sports and am a gun collector. A lot of people argue, "Why should someone have so many guns?" But to anyone that shoots guns will tell you that a "brand A" 9mm shoots different than a "brand B" 9mm. Just like different brand audio equipment sounds different. I have that urge to own every caliber, every style holster, every upgrade. Audio is such an expensive hobby. My goal was to buy a HT/music system on the used market at a good price and try to make it the best it can be "within reason" (low dollars) by trying different tweaks I've learned from this forum. I'm currently happy, but will be happier after a sub upgrade. Skip, I know from reading your posts that you are not one who is happy "settling", you are always looking to upgrade and find that better sound. That's what I'm afraid of. If you inherited my system, I know the first thing you would do is sell it off in search of something better. I'm afraid that if I hear something that sounds amazing, I will lose the "happiness" that I have now and not be satisfied until I reach a higher plateau. I see the prices that some of you are willing to spend in this hobby and I am scared of that "addictive behavior" that I have with my hobbies. For me, ignorance is bliss, perhaps.

TennMan

Hermitism wrote: »

I have a question before this thread dies. So many of these threads have reviews and observations based on having a "trained ear". I fully admit before joining this forum that I had no idea that you could actually hear the sound stage if you sit still and just concentrate on the music. I've taken advice from this forum; i.e., speaker placement, trying different speaker cables, acoustic panels, applying Dynamat and I am able to hear a difference. But how does one go about training their ears to hear the subtle difference that a lot of you speak of? I'm sure a lot of you that have been in this hobby for years can pick out changes in sound that I would not be able to. How did you get to that point to where you can pick up on "slight" changes? This might be why some people say that cables don't matter, because they don't know how to listen. It was never the norm for me to sit still while listening to music, it was more like background music, until I joined here. Is it just that some people have more sensitive hearing than others or is there a way to actually learn how to pick up on the most subtle changes in music?

The things you say you are able to hear are within the norm of what the average person on this forum probably hears. To be able to hear the differences in jumper cables as described in the thread you will have to jump on the band wagon and be willing to drink the Kool-Aid. I prefer to remain neutral and let common sense tell me what I can and can't hear.

I don't think I will ever be able to tell the differences in how copper wire is polished or tell the difference in the type of insulation that is on the wire by listening to a speaker connected to it no matter what training my ears get. Differences like that are measured by test equipment and the results are shown with charts and graphs. Charts and graphs are fine for informational purposes. However, I believe some people on this forum are trying too hard to hear what is is being displayed on the charts and graphs.

treitz3

Have you ever thought about the fact that some on this board actually can?

Tom

TennMan

treitz3 wrote: »

Have you ever thought about the fact that some on this board actually can?

Tom

I have thought about it but never considered it to be a fact.

BlueFox

TennMan wrote: »

I prefer to remain neutral and let common sense tell me what I can and can't hear.

Personally, I prefer to let my ears tell me what I can and can't hear. Common sense only works if you have some, and common tells me to clean my ears for optimum hearing.

treitz3

DSkip wrote: »

For those of you who CHOOSE to limit your journey, congratulations on putting your foot down and saying the buck stops here.

Exactly right......and there is not one thing wrong with that......but when it stops, it stops. It really does end there. For others who continue on, not so much.

Tom

Hermitism

I have no problem with others spending large amounts of money for audio/video. I can certainly understand it; I've gotten so much enjoyment out of my system since I've had it, so I see how spending money can be justified and worthwhile. I'm in an extremely unique situation compared to most here...I can say that my system is the best I've ever heard. I can honestly say that because I've never had an opportunity to hear better equipment, or a dedicated two channel system, or tubes. My listening experience for equipment consists of Circuit City, HH Gregg, and Best Buy. And it's been years since I've listened to their stuff. I guess what I'm saying is I've tried to use expanding Styrofoam insulation to plug up the rabbit hole. So far, it seems to be holding.

DarqueKnight

TennMan wrote: »

The things you say you are able to hear are within the norm of what the average person on this forum probably hears. To be able to hear the differences in jumper cables as described in the thread you will have to jump on the band wagon and be willing to drink the Kool-Aid. I prefer to remain neutral and let common sense tell me what I can and can't hear.

Comments referring to "drinking Kool-Aid" is not remaining neutral. If your common sense can tell you what you can and cannot hear, it should also tell you other people might be sensitive to things you are not.

TennMan wrote: »

I don't think I will ever be able to tell the differences in how copper wire is polished or tell the difference in the type of insulation that is on the wire by listening to a speaker connected to it no matter what training my ears get.

If you choose to limit your progress in this hobby that is your right. It does not make sense to belittle others who persue things you are unwilling or unable to understand. That is what "class clowns" do.

TennMan wrote: »

Differences like that are measured by test equipment and the results are shown with charts and graphs. Charts and graphs are fine for informational purposes. However, I believe some people on this forum are trying too hard to hear what is is being displayed on the charts and graphs.

Well this is an interesting twist. For the longest time naysayers raved about "if the differences audiophiles talked about existed, they would be measurable". Someone comes along and provides scientifically valid measurements, and now the party line is that audiophiles are forcing ourselves to hear the difference displayed in the measurements. I do commend you for not falling back on the tired old naysayer mantra of, "yeah, the difference is measureable, but it's inaudible" (all the while never justifying their belief in the inaudibility of the data).

DarqueKnight

Hermitism wrote: »

How did you get to that point to where you can pick up on "slight" changes?

Hermitism wrote: »

Is it just that some people have more sensitive hearing than others or is there a way to actually learn how to pick up on the most subtle changes in music?

There is nothing mystical or special about trained perception. By analogy, one might ask you do you know something is wrong with a friend even though they are smiling and saying nothing is wrong. The answer is that you have gotten to know them, and their emotional phases, over time. Someone who knows them casually will be fooled, but you are able to see through any mask they might throw up.

You get good with listening the same way you get good with seeing, smelling, tasting, touching: practice. How do you practice listening? Listening in the sweet spot with properly set up speakers and good quality recordings. Focus on where sound images are located in space and on the size, shape and sound quality of those images. Draw maps of where the images occur in the sound stage and make notes of the character of the sounds. Listen to the same records many times and try to catalog the placement and character of every sound in the sound stage. You will be surprised at all the different sonic elements that make up a recording and even all the different sonic elements that make up the sound of a single instrument.

For example, a piano solo can be a symphony in itself. You can spend many hours trying to document the following:

1. The weight and clarity of hammer strikes.
2. The sound of notes reverberating in the wooden body.
3. The "ticklish" nature of the highest notes.
4. The overtones of one note blending with the beginning of another.
5. The decaying vibrations of strings.
6. How tall, wide, and deep the sound image of the piano is.
7. The force of the pressure wave created by low notes.
8. The exact "location" of the piano in three dimensional space.
9. The stability of the sound image if you move your head to either side or turn you head to one side or the other.
10. The ambient reflections of the recording space.

For all of the piano attributes above, different equipment will render the attributes differently. Now, imagine the things to catalog if you are listening to an entire band, or an orchestra!

Hermitism wrote: »

This might be why some people say that cables don't matter, because they don't know how to listen.

That is true of some people. Others just like to argue.

Hermitism wrote: »

I have no problem with others spending large amounts of money for audio/video. I can certainly understand it; I've gotten so much enjoyment out of my system since I've had it, so I see how spending money can be justified and worthwhile.

Most true audiophiles are cheapskates. We don't spend money just to be spending money, we spend money to get the level of performance we seek, just like in any other hobby.

Hermitism wrote: »

You're going to make fun of me for this, but I've purposely tried to stay away from listening to high end audio systems.

That is unfortunate since listening to high quality, high resolution audio systems is one of the best ways to train your ears.

Hermitism wrote: »

I haven't walked in a high end audio store.

Unfortunately, audio stores that cater to knowledgeable audiophiles are a rare breed these days. Now the emphasis seems to be on selling the most expensive gear to the most gullible with the means to pay.

Hermitism wrote: »

I have such an obsessive/compulsive personality when it comes to hobbies. When I got into scuba diving, and had to buy every piece of equipment, every accessory. I'm an avid fan of shooting sports and am a gun collector. A lot of people argue, "Why should someone have so many guns?" But to anyone that shoots guns will tell you that a "brand A" 9mm shoots different than a "brand B" 9mm. Just like different brand audio equipment sounds different. I have that urge to own every caliber, every style holster, every upgrade.

I differentiate between true hobbyists, gear heads and collectors. True hobbyists, in any hobby, are in it for learning and growth. Gear heads are about owning as much equipment as possible, with little to no desire to become proficient, or expert, at using that equipment. Collectors are discriminating gear heads who have some appreciation of the value and purpose of the gear they own.

Hermitism wrote: »

Audio is such an expensive hobby.

Audio is no more expensive than any other hobby, like, for example, playing marbles or reading and collecting comic books. There is a crazy notion that you MUST spend a lot of money to get a quality system. That is not true...especially when you consider all the high quality gear on the used market.

There are nuts who, when they run across two audiophiles with long experience who are discussing the merits of an expensive piece of high performance audio gear, they get butthurt and think that said audiophiles are emphasizing that EVERYONE should go out and buy the item under discussion. I thought it was just common sense that every hobby has practitioners at every level of proficiency and degree of interest.

I didn't get into audio because I wanted to spend a lot of money. I got into audio because I love music and I love listening to well-recorded, well-reproduced music in my home. The equipment is just a means to that end. Quality does cost money, and the higher you go up in quality, the closer you get to the aural and tactile sensations of an actual live performance.

Hermitism wrote: »

I'm afraid that if I hear something that sounds amazing, I will lose the "happiness" that I have now and not be satisfied until I reach a higher plateau.

When I am on business trips or vacation, I often sometimes rent vehicles that are much better than the ones I own. I attend the local "Parade of Homes" every year where builders showcase their residential construction expertise. Never once have I driven a rental car or toured a high end home that made me dissatisfied with what I have. What I have serves me very well at this time, and I am always happy to go back to my car, my truck, my house. They are like old friends. I like to keep up with what is available so that when I am in the market for a new car, truck, or house, I can make a more informed, debiased purchase decision.

I have nine different audio systems ranging from the Sony "boombox" in my garage to my two channel audio system which has a retail value of over six figures. I don't love the most expensive system and hate the others. They all do what I want them to do, which is play music. My focus in this hobby is on the enjoyment of music, not on the enjoyment and bragging rights of collecting audio gear.

Hermitism wrote: »

I see the prices that some of you are willing to spend in this hobby and I am scared of that "addictive behavior" that I have with my hobbies. For me, ignorance is bliss, perhaps.

Awareness of a problem is the first step toward solving it.

Again, a true hobbyist focuses more on learning than spending. Satisfaction with any hobby is greater when you take things slow and spend as your level of knowledge and proficiency increases over time.

headrott

TennMan wrote: »

However, I believe some people on this forum are trying too hard to hear what is is being displayed on the charts and graphs.

DarqueKnight wrote: »

Well this is an interesting twist. For the longest time naysayers raved about "if the differences audiophiles talked about existed, they would be measurable". Someone comes along and provides scientifically valid measurements, and now the party line is that audiophiles are forcing ourselves to hear the difference displayed in the measurements. I do commend you for not falling back on the tired old naysayer mantra of, "yeah, the difference is measureable, but it's inaudible" (all the while never justifying their belief in the inaudibility of the data).

Agreed.

Also, I think it can it be said TennMan, that some are trying too hard to justify what they can't hear; all the while bashing those that can hear what those that can't hear.

TennMan

headrott wrote: »

Agreed.

Also, I think it can it be said TennMan, that some are trying too hard to justify what they can't hear; all the while bashing those that can hear what those that can't hear.

I might be guilty of trying too hard to make my point but I'm not bashing anyone. I'm just expressing my opinion (and it's just that and nothing more) on why some people claim to hear differences in audio components that the average person cannot. I don't mean any disrespect to DK or anyone else on this forum.

I think DK is probably one of the smartest and most well educated men on this forum when it comes to audio equipment. Although he doesn't list his speakers and associated gear in his signature, I think he probably has the best of everything. I wish I could say the same of myself and my equipment. I read everything he writes and learn a lot from it. That doesn't mean I have to agree with everything he says. I'm sure he doesn't agree with a lot, or maybe most, of what I say but that doesn't mean we are bashing each other. We are just expressing differing opinions in a civil manner.

ZLTFUL

TennMan wrote: »

Although he doesn't list his speakers and associated gear in his signature, I think he probably has the best of everything.

Here you go: http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/system-showcase/view.php?userid=18511

Thing is, Raife does an almost crazy amount of research into his gear upgrades (or at least that's what I can discern from his threads).

I think everyone is entitled to their opinions as long as they aren't trying to pass their opinions off as fact and are always willing to keep an open mind. But I think Wayne Dyer said it best:

The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

BlueFox

DarqueKnight wrote: »

I have nine different audio systems ranging from the Sony "boombox" in my garage to my two channel audio system which has a retail value of over six figures. I don't love the most expensive system and hate the others. They all do what I want them to do, which is play music. My focus in this hobby is on the enjoyment of music, not on the enjoyment and bragging rights of collecting audio gear.

One thing that does irritate me on this forum is when people denigrate home theater systems as not being good enough for music. I use my HT system as a spare stereo, a surround sound system, and even enjoy multi-channel stereo. While my two channel system is an order of magnitude better in quality, and price, I have no problem at all using the HT system for music. Some nights I even alternate between the two just for variety. However, I do need to upgrade the jumpers on my surround (rear) speakers.

DarqueKnight

ZLTFUL wrote: »

Here you go: http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/system-showcase/view.php?userid=18511

Thing is, Raife does an almost crazy amount of research into his gear upgrades (or at least that's what I can discern from his threads).

I do a crazy amount of research for anything costing over 50 bucks.:biggrin:

Hermitism

DK, thanks for the in-depth and detailed response. I have a couple character flaws that would make it difficult to listen to music with such focus. First, I don't have a lot of patience. I've been that way my whole life. I always want to get the end result as fast as possible and skip the foreplay. Which sometimes doesn't make me popular with the ladies. I'm working on that! Second, I have trouble sitting still and paying attention. I'll start playing a CD with the intention of just focusing on the words and instruments, then ten minutes later I suddenly realize that for the past five minutes I've been trying to solve a work problem or personal problem and the music had become secondary. Now movies on the other hand, seem to do a good job of holding my attention. They are like a vacation from my life, an escape. I'm terribly guilty of playing music, sitting down in my chair, and using my tablet while listening. I have to give credit to the people that can hold their focus for such an extended period of time with no distractions. I can't even sit in a chair without constantly squirming around in it.

DarqueKnight

TennMan wrote: »

Although he [DK] doesn't list his speakers and associated gear in his signature, I think he probably has the best of everything.

I have been reluctant to call attention to my audio gear since a forum member looked at my system showcase and diagnosed me with Asperger's syndrome.:eek::razz:

unc2701 wrote: »

DK-
Finally, and this is not meant as an insult: I think you have Asperger's. I work with a guy that has it and your posts are absolutely full of markers... even your system showcase pics have some hints of it.

Mr. Bubbles

DarqueKnight wrote: »

I have been reluctant to call attention to my audio gear since a forum member looked at my system showcase and diagnosed me with Asperger's syndrome.:eek::razz:

Kind of funny you mentioned that. Some of that thread seemd to go down much the same road as this one. Hmmmmmm

DarqueKnight

Mr. Bubbles wrote: »

Kind of funny you mentioned that. Some of that thread seemd to go down much the same road as this one. Hmmmmmm

That's typical of cable threads.

Hermitism

Is Asperger's the one where you yell out obscenities? That's the disorder that I'd like to have. Sometimes I would love to be able to yell out four letter words and not get into any trouble for it. Since I can't sit still for any length of time, I figure I already have either Attention Deficit Disorder or worms.

tonyb

Hermitism wrote: »

I figure I already have either Attention Deficit Disorder or worms.

Given your locale...I'm thinking worms. LOL

DarqueKnight

Hermitism wrote: »

Is Asperger's the one where you yell out obscenities?

No. That is Tourette syndrome.

Tourette syndrome

Asperger syndrome

headrott

TennMan wrote: »

I might be guilty of trying too hard to make my point but I'm not bashing anyone. I'm just expressing my opinion (and it's just that and nothing more) on why some people claim to hear differences in audio components that the average person cannot. I don't mean any disrespect to DK or anyone else on this forum.

I think DK is probably one of the smartest and most well educated men on this forum when it comes to audio equipment. Although he doesn't list his speakers and associated gear in his signature, I think he probably has the best of everything. I wish I could say the same of myself and my equipment. I read everything he writes and learn a lot from it. That doesn't mean I have to agree with everything he says. I'm sure he doesn't agree with a lot, or maybe most, of what I say but that doesn't mean we are bashing each other. We are just expressing differing opinions in a civil manner.

TennMan, I was referring to those that *generally* disagree with those that can hear differences in cables and other components.

However, telling people that can hear differences in cables and other components that they are "drinking the cool-aid" is what I would consider "bashing". However, have others done worse? Absolutely. Furthermore, I personally don't take offense to the comment. I know what I can hear, I however, do not know what I cannot hear.

F1nut

There's different grades of Kool-Aid, I prefer the El Supremo.

headrott

Haha! Shows you the last time I drank some Kool-Aid! I mispelled the name!

Moose68Bash

DarqueKnight wrote: »

I do a crazy amount of research for anything costing over 50 bucks.:biggrin:

And what we all need to be grateful for is your willingness and ability to share it on the forum!

Thanks for that.