Might as well by IC's on looks....

RuSsMaN

Get a couple lengths of coat hanger out the closet, and run your test again.

You don't need to fly to see Jesse, HBomb is just down the road from you, no? I bet he'll buy you lunch regardless, and you can listen to some rigs that can offer a little more resolution than what you are used to.

Carry on, I'm not beating a dead horse.

Cheers,
Russ

jdhdiggs

The tone is a signal. PT is gathering data from across the audio spectrum. If there was a tone difference, it would show up as a difference in volume at a particular frequency.

The tone of a speaker or amp would be measurable using the methods that he is using. This has been shown in multiple threads over at AVS, Stereophile, and elsewhere.

All I'm saying is that if cable "A" is sending the same signal cable "B" is sending, they will sound exactly the same. If you read the "tech specs" and "theory" that the cable makers spout, there would be differences in some of the data that he's showing.

I would say that since the frequency isn't measured against a time axis, there could be some differences noted in that realm.

As to what cables I'm using, you know what I have. I have some Tribs, some AR, and generic patch. I have not personally noticed any improvement between the cables, but then they are sill in the same ballpark or the shortcoming is elsewhere in the system.

As to whether cables make a difference? I know that they can, but all properly shielded and gauged cables "should" sound the same. I am very willing to be proved wrong.

Sounds like a great test for the next gathering...

jdhdiggs

Originally posted by Early B.
Yeah, that may be part of the problem. Try using decent 2-channel components for your testing.

Aack, the cry of the audiophile snob... What would be a "good enough" of a system to tell the differences? If you listen to Sid, he makes it sound like the difference between having Heidi Klum naked in your room or Russman naked in your room.

Let's just run the experiment at the next gathering and we will test it with "ears" and a good "source"

PolkThug

Originally posted by RuSsMaN
Get a couple lengths of coat hanger out the closet, and run your test again.

You don't need to fly to see Jesse, HBomb is just down the road from you, no? I bet he'll buy you lunch regardless, and you can listen to some rigs that can offer a little more resolution than what you are used to.

Carry on, I'm not beating a dead horse.

Cheers,
Russ

You read my mind about the coat hangers, I was thinking about trying that.

Always a good time at Henry's.

unc2701

I'd love to see the results of the double blinds. As for me, I'm half in both camps... I think that there are some properties of the cables that are not captured just by its electrical characteristics, but I also think that all the old farts who can afford the expensive cables are too deaf to hear a damn thing anyway. I should mention that many of the "specialized" cable companies all use the exact same belden wire and just put different connectors and coverings on it.

Anyhow, I'm a statistician, so if you do get to run your double blinds, I can tell you whether they got it right better than would be expected by random chance.

PolkThug

Originally posted by Early B.
Yeah, that may be part of the problem. Try using decent 2-channel components for your testing.

OK, let's assume that the IC's do have ability to change the tone. Is it the speakers, or the amplification (in my particular setup) that "re-normalizes" the tone?

Since the DAC occurs before the IC is introduced, the normalization would have to occur at a point after the IC, right?

Regards,
PT

steveinaz

Originally posted by PolkThug
I'm finding that all of the interconnects I have tried don't alter sound at all.

Consider that a blessing...the less neurotic you get about this hobby, the more you enjoy it. I'm content with my $65 IC's.

Early B.

Aack, the cry of the audiophile snob... What would be a "good enough" of a system to tell the differences?

Just basing my comments on my own experiences. I've wasted money on decent interconnects trying to get better sound from a receiver. I've gotten much, much better results with my 2-channel system.

RuSsMaN

Ed Zachry.

jdhdiggs

Well, if there is a difference, it should show up on virutally any system, shouldn't it? The scale of the change would just be different.

I just want to try it myself on a great system some time...

PolkThug

Originally posted by Early B.
Just basing my comments on my own experiences. I've wasted money on decent interconnects trying to get better sound from a receiver. I've gotten much, much better results with my 2-channel system.

So, one conclusion that could be reached as to why I don't hear a difference for the subjective portion is that (assuming IC's make a difference):

Interconnect 1 produces sonic signature A.
Interconnect 2 produces sonic signature B.

Amplification of these signals by Onkyo changes either A or B into sonic signature C for the final result.

Early B.

Well, if there is a difference, it should show up on virutally any system, shouldn't it?

Not necessarily.

Early B.

"So, one conclusion that could be reached as to why I don't hear a difference for the subjective portion is that (assuming IC's make a difference):

Interconnect 1 produces sonic signature A.
Interconnect 2 produces sonic signature B.

Amplification of these signals by Onkyo changes either A or B into sonic signature C for the final result."


It ain't quite that linear. Could be that the speakers aren't producing enough detail to notice the difference, quality of the internal components to deliver a cleaner signal, quality of speaker cable, the source, etc. I'm not saying interconnects won't make a difference on your current system, just that the differences are likely to be minor, if at all.

jdhdiggs

Originally posted by Early B.
Not necessarily.

Care to explain? How does the system filter back out the changes and converts everything to the exact same signal?

Care to explain how that happens?

Just read your post... There would still be a difference. If there is one that is present put it falls under the resolution of the speakers/amp section/mic, I would suggest that it is inaudible and therefore his point is correct.

ninerbj

I now feel I belong to the "if you can't hear the difference in cables..your system is ****" camp. and speaking of ****...

shack

I'm going to take the George Grand approach on this one....I can hear a difference. If you can't....I don't care. Finis

jdhdiggs

Originally posted by ninerbj
I now feel I belong to the "if you can't hear the difference in cables..your system is ****" camp. and speaking of ****...

Hmm, even though every borderline "scientific" experiment has gone the otherway? People could just also say "everyone that here's a difference is a gullible moron". It doesn't solve anything.

Are you sure this isn't psychology speaking? That effect has been proven beyond a doubt. I tell you item B is superior to A and you would immediately agree about 90%+ of the time, even if they are the same item...

It is interesting that one camp chants "Let's test it, with either equipment or ears with blind testing" The other group says "Your gear sucks" or "I can tell on my system, so I don't need to test it". It does sound like the second group doesn't want to be wrong (of course the $$$ tied up might have something to do with it)

Let's plan on it at the gathering.

Remeber, this is fun!

ninerbj

That must mean you don't have have a **** system then Shack!

shack

Originally posted by ninerbj
That must mean you don't have have a **** system then Shack!

Eye of the beholder I guess. I like it.

F1nut

I'm in the camp that doesn't think one will notice much, if any improvement/difference in cables when using a receiver. The base quality of the electronics isn't there.

I've got a vintage Pioneer integrated amp with a matching tuna in the guest room. Just for fun I tried a few different IC's on the rig. I could detect no difference at all. Now, on my big rig, every cable I've tried yielded immediate and noticable differences.

ninerbj

***I'm in the camp that doesn't think one will notice much, if any improvement/difference in cables when using a receiver. The base quality of the electronics isn't there.***

Must be the hampster wheel in those low grade receivers that limits your ability to hear any difference.

PolkThug

Ok, I've gotten some good feedback here, and for that I thank everyone.

So, what about the closed loop testing? There is no amplification or speakers after the signal passes through the interconnect, yet the sonic signature is the same. A cable that has "better bass" or is "bright" should show a difference.

Regards,
PT

steveinaz

Core components folks, core components. In the grand scheme of things your components account for 99.9% of your SQ. As long as you have a well made, good material quality cable you should be fine. If you suspect you have some sort of "deficiency" in your system, and think you're going to cure it with exotic cables...it's a fools paradise.

Take it from this fool, who has been down that road. On the other hand, if you have money to burn and you're bored......

phuz

Originally posted by PolkThug
In the beginning, I calibrated the sound card using the cheap cable in the loop.

Something about this just sets off all sorts of sirens and warnings to me.

If you "calibrated" the sound card, that tells me that it is doing a conversion from analog to digital for signal processing, then back to analog for the output stage. I gotta wonder at which point the software is reading the tones. Is it before the conversion/processing, or after... closer to the output stage?

I could be way off here. I'm not exactly clear on how everything is set up, but I think it's either that, the sound card, or something else in your setup that is equalizing the test/tones

2+2

I didn't believe cables sound different...until I tried some different ones. I have the KnuKoncepts silver coated PolkThug shows. Nice cables. They sound different than ARs and IXOS I also have and Blue Jeans, Monsters and Rat shack I have tried. I don't exactly know why. But even my wife who can give a rats **** about audio systems can hear the difference....As to which one is better, that is probably matter of preference....but the difference is there.

Someone noted that people may be old and cant hear well....this may also play a significant role. No offense to anyone but why do we assume that everyone has even the capacity to hear the small nuance of change between cables? You dont expect a person with poor vision without corrective lenses to critique color/sharpness etc on various TV's do you? Same thing.

My $0.02.

BlueMDPicker

This was said of the late Nobel Laureate Dick Feynman by his friend (the actor) Alan Alda in a commencement speech he gave to the Caltech class of 2002. (full text here )

"Feynman was comfortable with not knowing. He enjoyed it. He would proceed for a while with an idea as if he believed it was the answer. But that was only a temporary belief in order to allow himself to follow it wherever it led. Then, a little while later, he would vigorously attack the idea to see if it could stand up to every test he could think of. If it couldn't stand up, then he simply decided he just didn't know. "Not knowing," he said, "is much more interesting than believing an answer which might be wrong."

PolkThug

phuz,

The calibration creates a correction file to make up for deficiencies in the soundcard. During calibration, a full sweep is sent and TrueRTA measures the differences betweent the output and the input to make a correction file. This is just like using correction files for microphones.

Regards,
PT

Jstas

Originally posted by Frank Z
Pulls out lawn chair and waits for the flames to start flowing like wine......

Hey, is this seat next to you taken?

jdhdiggs

In reality, I don't care that much, I just think it would be a fun experiment. I did some tests on speaker break-in that were very telling and proof enough to myself how much/little of a difference break-in made.

F1 and others, not picking on you since I am serious:

I noticed no difference when changeing from patch cord to Russ's old tributaries. The CDP was an analog devices CDP modified with a tube output and power supply by Scott Nixon which then went to an Adcom SLC 505 passive pre-amp to a Carver a500x and then out to the SDA-1B's. Are my ears defective? Another compnent limiting the change? Not enough difference in quality from the tribs and patch cord?

I have also admitted that I may be deaf which is why I'd want to "experiment" on others

of course I was the only one in the loop on my SDA's that identified that the speakers where wired incorrectly after restoration by sound... Bad monkey's, bad!

PolkThug

Originally posted by 2+2
I have the KnuKoncepts silver coated PolkThug shows. Nice cables.

I really like that cable too, the "locking connectors" really work, and it looks cool. It will stay in my system for a long time. The cloth lined box it comes in is fabulous as well.