Five Speaker Jumper Comparisons For The SDA SRS 1.2TL

F1nut

headrott wrote: »

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

I also have the Steely Dan T-shirt. :cheesygrin:

villian

DSkip wrote: »

...yet you argue the fact that jumper cables make a difference when they carry an analog signal.

Where did I ever say that?

DSkip wrote: »

I'm a bit confused on your stance here? You say that they make a difference, but actually HEARING the difference is absurdity?

Perceiving the difference, not hearing it.

Kinda like when someone eggs your car. Technically it's damaged (There are microscopic scratches all over the paint finish) but who is really able to see and distinguish that damage after washing off the egg?

BKphoto

at least you are consistent...

you knew a lot about photography the other day...

now this...

nspindel

bkphoto wrote: »

at least you are consistent...

You knew a lot about photography the other day...

Now this...

^^^this^^^

F1nut

villian wrote: »

Kinda like when someone eggs your car.

You've had your car egged......LOL

Says a lot about you.

ZLTFUL

villian wrote: »

Where did I ever say that?

First you said it here: www.polkaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?160408-Five-Speaker-Jumper-Comparisons-For-The-SDA-SRS-1.2TL&p=2040160&viewfull=1#post2040160

And again here: http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?160408-Five-Speaker-Jumper-Comparisons-For-The-SDA-SRS-1.2TL&p=2040967&viewfull=1#post2040967

My dad always said, if you don't lie, you never have to remember what you said.

treitz3

villian wrote: »

If you can prove to me that 0's and 1's sound differently via different cables, then please do.

It doesn't work like that here. The proof lies on you to prove that they don't. The vast majority of us here already know the facts, time for you to school yourself. Be forewarned, you might actually learn something.

Tom

leftwinger57

Blue Fox, I originally thought I was going for the same thing. After having the most horrendous Sharp HTIB I finally got what I thought was a decent H/T system.Thought because it failed miserably at playing music at the quality I thought a new 90watt Yamaha would deliver. Movies were great, the opening scene of Valkerie for example when the Mustang comes in for the attack and the akak goes off and then the machines the room shook. When it came to music, it was a major diappointment where at a high volume (not earth shaking by any means) the avr clipped and went into protecto mode. I was lucky it came back and even luckier that the avr had pre/outs and as soon as could afford it I got the stand alone Adcom which made all the difference. Point being I did have a bad experience using my h/t avr for music. Are there better avr than my RX-V665 of course but it should have performed better than what it did.

headrott

villian wrote: »

Have you ever accidentally pressed the button during the hearing tests?

I rest my case.

I never disputed that humans make mistakes. What is your point?

villian wrote: »

PS - Control of the brain is easier said then done. The key is "Subconscious" bias, and the last time I checked NO human is fully in control of their subconscious.

I disagree that listening biases are subconscious. Where is your documented proof of this?

Mr. Bubbles

Holy Crap! I figured this would be over by now. This is just sad at this point.

tonyb

Nothing wrong with a little entertainment value every now and then.

Mr. Bubbles

I like good entertainment but when a movie gets much longer than 3 hours it starts getting uninteresting too.

tonyb

The classics never get old my friend. We have some threads from years ago we still dig up every now and then for the simple entertainment. What can we say, we're simple animals.

nspindel

It does seem like any thread that gets active about any sort of cable talk always attracts people who've been a member of the forum for a month, have 50 posts, and insist that anything to do with cables is placebo, and expect you to prove something to them.

SciFiTom

IMHO, it takes a pretty good system to hear a difference in cables. Perhaps, it is more evident to someone who has invested in JC-1s, and made his Polks a labor of love. That said, in my youth I was able to discern 1dB differences easily, and was involved in album mix-downs. Today tinnitus, and age cause a distressing inability to tell the difference in many sound qualities, so I have not spent vast sums to acquire great amps and cables. More power to anyone who can hear the subtle differences. Enjoy it while you can.

Tom

OldmanSRS

I can hear a 1dB change. It's not much but it's detectable. I think the definition of a dB is the smallest volume change an average person can detect.

DarqueKnight

It's not just differences in sound level between cables, there can also be differences in imaging and sound stage dimensions.

headrott

And, I'll add tone(s) to that as well.

Face

OldmanSRS wrote: »

I can hear a 1dB change. It's not much but it's detectable. I think the definition of a dB is the smallest volume change an average person can detect.

Decibel is only a measurement of energy, there are also other identifiable differences that can place within the same dB. Some of those items are phase, distortion, and although it's debatable, group delay.

tonyb

SciFiTom wrote: »

IMHO, it takes a pretty good system to hear a difference in cables.
Tom

Eh...yes and no Tom. Maybe a more "revealing" system is the proper terminology...and that need not cost a lot of coin. Differences in cables can be subtle...but also profound, even if your ears are old like mine. So I wouldn't poo-poo the idea of trying different stuff.

OldmanSRS

Face wrote: »

Decibel is only a measurement of energy

It's not only that. In relationship to hearing it equates in terms of sound volume to the the smallest volume change an average listener can detect.

I think we need a new argument on this thread

TennMan

OldmanSRS wrote: »

I think we need a new argument on this thread

I don't! I think we have argued enough. Whoa!! - that's an opinion and on here giving an opinion is an argument. Looks like I just started a new argument with you.

BlueFox

TennMan wrote: »

I don't! I think we have argued enough. Whoa!! - that's an opinion and on here giving an opinion is an argument. Looks like I just started a new argument with you.

Only when you state an opinion as a fact, and then say people are delusional (placebo effect) if they do not agree with your opinion.

ZLTFUL

Well that's just like your opinion, man.

treitz3

DarqueKnight wrote: »

It's not just differences in sound level between cables, there can also be differences in imaging and sound stage dimensions.

In my audio travels, I have met many who don't even know what that really means or what is possible. They still think that sound eminating from a left and a right speaker is imaging. Makes me chuckle. If they only knew...

Tom

Hermitism

DarqueKnight wrote: »

I have never heard or seen a difference in audio or video performance with any digital cable I've tried, whether it was optical, coax, or HDMI. The last digital cable comparison I did was in 2009:

Tweaking-Home-Theater-Pt.-3-The-Pioneer-Elite-BDP-09FD-Blu-ray-Player.

I compared HDMI cables made by Acoustic Research ($20), Rocketfish ($85), and Monster Cable ($130). There was no performance difference among them. I subsequently compared the $20 Acoustic Research HDMI cables to $8 Monoprice HDMI cables, didn't see or hear a difference between them, then returned the AR cables.

It took me forever to find this. I remembered you saying that you didn't hear any difference in HDMI cables. There is no doubt that you have a more trained ear than me. I was using a Monster Ultra 800 HDMI between my Blu-ray player and my SC-05. Then I upgraded it to an AudioQuest Chocolate HDMI, late last year. When I hooked it up it seemed to have a brighter sound than what I was hearing before. A brighter sound was not what I was hoping for, but now I don't seem to notice it anymore. Is there a burn-in process with HDMI cables like there is with speaker cables? Could that account for the brightness I thought I was hearing when I first started using the new cable or was I just imagining a difference? Or did I just get used to it over time? Or am I just looney?

villian

Hermitism wrote: »

It took me forever to find this. I remembered you saying that you didn't hear any difference in HDMI cables. There is no doubt that you have a more trained ear than me. I was using a Monster Ultra 800 HDMI between my Blu-ray player and my SC-05. Then I upgraded it to an AudioQuest Chocolate HDMI, late last year. When I hooked it up it seemed to have a brighter sound than what I was hearing before. A brighter sound was not what I was hoping for, but now I don't seem to notice it anymore. Is there a burn-in process with HDMI cables like there is with speaker cables? Could that account for the brightness I thought I was hearing when I first started using the new cable or was I just imagining a difference? Or did I just get used to it over time? Or am I just looney?

I think there's a burn in time. My image appeared brighter for at least the first 3 months after I swapped cables. Eventually it settled down, I think. Hard to really tell the difference sometimes, but I'm pretty sure it made a decent difference.