Finally, an end to the cable debate!

unc2701

yes, but which IC would you use to hook the mouse to the mixing board?

PolkThug

Originally posted by unc2701
yes, but which IC would you use to hook the mouse to the mixing board?

A giraffe's spinal cord.

PolkThug

Perfect mic:

dragon1952

If scientists could figure out a way to make recordings via your human ears, would you rather have a recording of your favorite live performance done with a human ear, or a microphone like what is used now?

Are YOU talkin' to ME?

PolkThug

Yeah, my question was stemming from your sarcasm.

If our ears are better than squiggly lines, then perhaps our ears may make better mics than the actual microphones used to record the squiggly lines.

Of course, I'm being only half-serious.

Some people argue that we should trust our ears and not microphones paired with real-time analyzers (squiggly lines), as has been one of the debates since way before I was ever into audio.

The human frequency response curve is not as accurate as a $50 microphone's response curve, this was proven before I was born.

My point is that a "squiggly line" produced by my ear is not as good as the squiggly line produced by measurement devices.

*This post is all in good fun and of course, IMO.

dragon1952

My point is that a "squiggly line" produced by my ear is not as good as the squiggly line produced by measurement devices.

Yeah, well squiggly lines aside, there's obviously something else going on that can't be explained or measured. And since we don't listen with measuring devices I'll have to go by what my ears tell me.
That's my story and I'm sticking to it! :cool:

Whadyasay

See, Dragon, you're being a bit too dismissive of the process I described. These 'squigly lines' are very precise, and have proven to show incredibly minute detail in sound that the human ear cannot decipher. Combine that with a microphone many times more sensitive than the human ear. If you were to use the eardrum as a mic (eardrum = diaphram) it would not record as much detail as the mic we used. Neither would a dog's ear. Additionally, I didn't just look at the lines and say they're the same...I reversed the phase of one and played it against the other, and got total cancellation to the extent that it was better than when I've had to eliminate sound material on other recordings, but I was a few samples off. There was alot of comparison and testing based on THE REAL SOUND coming from the monitors...just like how it's delivered to US, not with oscilloscopes or ohm meters hooked up to the wire.

Again, the big caveat was that I didn't have a whole lot of cables on hand, but the ones I did varied in their price and construction (all well-contructed, but the Kimbers were braided, the AR's and AQ's were twisted pair, the Monsters were coax, etc.). SOME difference should have justified the price differences. We thn did tests with cheap-**** 18AWG speaker wire, and there was a slight difference in the amplitude, which was a more obvious result, but the overalllength of the wire was only 6 feet.

Perhaps this IS a testament to the mystical qualities of some cables...or at least some innate aversion to technology that we all have which manifests itself through sensory perception. I do agree that if we had a wider choice of cables, some differences would probably show up, but they would be so small that it would be hard to justify the costs based on materials used and construction. It's there we would start to get into differences in capacitance/resistance/inductance.....but as many here have stated, those numbers are 'meaningless'. Or are they?

Ask yourself this...if you did one of the so-called 'Blind' tests, not knowing which cables you were listening to before hearing the material...and you consistently picked #3, for example, later to find out that you chose regular Home Depot 12AWG speaker wire over some MIT's or some other high-priced ultra-designed cable, would you be inclined to use the Home Depot wire exclusively?

True, we don't have a computer hooked up to our ears, so if there are differences, they are being processed somewhere inside of us. Fine. Then again, if these cable manufacturers can control or manipulate those processes through different wired with the same functional and scientific properties....why is it only being applied to cable?

PolkThug

Originally posted by dragon1952
And since we don't listen with measuring devices I'll have to go by what my ears tell me.

Good point!

Regards,
PT

F1nut

Originally posted by Whadyasay
Me, I choose to save that money for other things and get the same performance as the exotic stuff...which makes me feel better about my system and the person who owns it.

I think you've got a few issues other than cables.



As my good friend Doro would say, this discussion has been going on and will continue until the end of time. Some hear a difference, some don't.

Maybe it's in the minds of those that can't hear a difference, not the other way around.


I'm outta this one.

PolkThug

Originally posted by F1nut
Maybe it's in the minds of those that can't hear a difference, not the other way around.

My computer refuses to hear a difference as well.

shack

These 'squigly lines' are very precise, and have proven to show incredibly minute detail in sound that the human ear cannot decipher. Combine that with a microphone many times more sensitive than the human ear. If you were to use the eardrum as a mic (eardrum = diaphram) it would not record as much detail as the mic we used.

Ok then...just because you can measure it doesn't mean you can hear it...and I will argue conversly....just because you can hear it doesn't mean you can measure it.

The human body is a marvel beyond anything that science can create at this time. To the best of my knowledge, while there have been some mechanical devices that can mimic and perform some of the fuctions of the human body, (pacemakers, dialysis machines, prostectic limbs, etc....) not one has come close to the intricate workings of even the simplest of the human organs. THE EARS INCLUDED! Yes...the human body is fragile and easily damaged and/or destroyed but when it works there are no machines that can equal the entire package that is the human organism.

You guys can trust the data your man made machines tell you with the "squigly" lines or whatever. For now I think I'll trust the ears attached to the brain that were designed and created by a much better "engineer".

PolkThug

If a microphone is responsible for recording all of the detail that we hear in our favorite singer's voice on our albums, then why couldn't a microphone detect changes induced by interconnects?

dragon1952

Ask yourself this...if you did one of the so-called 'Blind' tests, not knowing which cables you were listening to before hearing the material...and you consistently picked #3, for example, later to find out that you chose regular Home Depot 12AWG speaker wire over some MIT's or some other high-priced ultra-designed cable, would you be inclined to use the Home Depot wire exclusively?

I don't feel the type of test you're referring to gives you enough time to fully determine a definite preference, however I don't care if I use lamp cord if it was clearly my preference. I'm the only one who listens to my system and I'm the only one who I have to please. One thing objectivists always count on is that we are all (100% of us) swayed by advertising, hype and other exterior factors that cloud our perceptions. I'm sure many are but it certainly isn't even close to everyone. It's just an easy way for them to explain away the fact that many people claim to have distinct preferences.

2+2

I have some legit Qs for ya all on the topic of acoustics that the scientist in me would like to know...

When people talk about measurning sound, why is it just frequency?

Freq. cant be everything as someone noted about "tone". Surely, a C# produced by a guitar is clearly different sound than one made by a Steinway, which also differs from one made by a Yamaha upright. The frequency will be the same right, but the sound will be very different.

So what are the other parameters? Are these parameters accurately measureable and "graphable" using the "squiggly lines"? How are other parameters measured including (pardon my laymans terms) sustain, reverb, airyness, presence, timbre, harmonics?

I would think that all these factors would have to be "measurable" and displayable on a graph.

I am new to all this cable stuff but the differences I hear between cables are subtle and are not in frequency. It is in the other parameters such as sustain, reverb, airyness.....I would like to hear some thoughts.

Finally, Whadaysay, I also noticed that I can hear distinctions between cables more clearly in my System 1 vs my System 2, and cable A sounds better in System 1 whereas cable B (cheaper) sounds better in System 2...not everyone is easily influenced by cost.

unc2701

Amplitude (size), Frequency, and shape... that's all. One of the arguements for vinyl over CDs is that CDs approximate shape using fourier transforms. If you get the chance, get an old synth that lets you play with waveforms.

shack

If a microphone is responsible for recording all of the detail that we hear in our favorite singer's voice on our albums, then why couldn't a microphone detect changes induced by interconnects?

My point was that microphones, etc. were designed to reproduce, measure sound as we understand it. Maybe we don't understand all of the intricacies of the human ear so while a microphone may be able to repoduce the sound to the best of our knowlege, we may not be able to measure what the ear can process. You can measure intense heat...but can you accurately measure the pain it causes to the skin and transmitted to the brain? You can measure an odor as to it's composition but can you measure accurately how that information is processed by the brain when smelled by the nose? Maybe we are talking about not only what the ear receives in but how it processes that info.

2+2

Yes, there will be an amplitude associated with frequencies (which is required for a 2 dimensional graph)....so in the sound frequency spectrum, a recorded note would have certain amplitude for a given frequency....but what about the other sound qualities? ....or are you saying that they are all represented in the amplitude/frequency? That cant be the only two things..or could it? I also remembered about different order harmonics. Are they also represented?

Whadyasay

If they are different from one another, yes they will show up as different...meaning if one recording of Song A sounds different in any way from another recording of Song A (whether it be in harmonics, soundstage/phasing, sustain, reverb, thinness, fullness, what have you), both recordings, if different, will not copletely cancel the other out when stacked with one of them phase reversed. If they do cancel out completely, they are the same across the board.

Also folks.....the 'squigly line' equipment and approach I used are the same stuff that's used to CREATE a lot of what we listen to over the systems and cables in question. If you're okay with using it to record and mix the sound...why do you negate its validity when using it to test the sound?

Dragon...it doesn't have to be my test. It could be any kind of test that anyone feels is fair, as long as noone knows which cable brand/type they are listening to (other than letting them know they're hearing Cable #1, etc.) until the test is over. Look at it as a blind 'Dating-Game' like test, as if you won't find out what the possible dates look like until after you've asked the personality questions and such and made a choice.

Lastly, I am not saying to anyone "You are not hearing a difference...what you are perceiving is NOT happening" I haven't said that...in fact I've said that I THOUGHT I HEARD differences too, and I tried to prove that differences can be heard by measuring what was being heard. F1Nut...I'm not questioning whether people hear things differently. The question is, where are these differences originating from? And what I've tried to show with these tests is that it's possible (and in many cases proveable) that it's NOT coming from the cables. It's coming from inside of us. Which is fine....but how is that tied to the premium costs on some of these cables, and what kind of control do the manufacturers have over our internal processes?

PolkThug

Originally posted by 2+2
Surely, a C# produced by a guitar is clearly different sound than one made by a Steinway, which also differs from one made by a Yamaha upright. The frequency will be the same right, but the sound will be very different.

This is called harmonics (which are measureable).

2+2

I have an old Sansui graphic equalizer....it allows me to adjust not only the gain in various frequencies, but it also allows me to adjust "Reverb" (and custom tailor reverb at different frequencies), and further allows me to dial up "Presence". (Dont worry, its not hooked up in my system as it introduces too much noise as in hiss). This is the type of differences I have noticed in listening to cables...although bass response is also another varying characteristic I have noticed.

So, the measured frequency and harmonics account for all the sound eh. Well I sures hell dont understand what is going on wrt why I am hearing differences....(please dont give me the "bias" line as I assure you that is not the case).

All this makes Polkmanics test even more interesting to me....

.....being able to hear that which cannot be measured is the essence of hi-fi audio.....

(how do you like my coined phrase?)

Whadyasay

Yes....also, different physical resonating surfaces for each instrument.

Well, if you're okay with a cable adding these audio effects, then cool I'm in no place to question what you like. But a lot of folks would ideally want a cable that lets all audio information through without affecting it in any way.

dragon1952

And what I've tried to show with these tests is that it's possible (and in many cases proveable) that it's NOT coming from the cables. It's coming from inside of us.

I guess that explains why cheap **** like their cheap cables and rich **** like their expensive cables.
No , actually you (and most ojectivists) make the assumption that we humans will always prefer the most expensive or glitzy product and when someone mentions that they've actually preferred the plain, inexpensive cable you ignore it because it doesn't fit your argument.
I've been in too many of these arguments and they never go anywhere. The objectivists come across as arrogant becuase they believe they know things about human perceptions and tendencies that the rest of us dumbasses never thought of, and the subjectivists end up getting pissed off from being talked down to. I guess when we reach that higher plane that the objectivists are on we'll all suddenly know the meaning of life :rolleyes:

Whadyasay

No, I'm not saying that we'll ALWAYS prefer something or another because of it's price or cosmetics, although that can factor in sometimes. My point about testing is that a fair listening test should be performed without the listener knowing the brand/make of the cables being tested until the results are in.

Let's say I have two sets of cables and you don't know who makes each. We run 20 listening tests on your system, and for each one, you pick A or B, in terms of what you think sounds better, and the order in which the cables were tested for each test was varied...so you weren't hearing Cable A first each time. After the tests are over, let's say you chose B 16 out of 20 times. We then reveal Cable B to be a set of Radio Shack Gold series cables, and Cable A is a considerably more expensive type that you actually own and use. Would you then be inclined to switch out your cables for the ones you prefered during the test, even if they are Radio Shacks?

Where have I talked down to anyone...what are you afraid of? I'm simply bringing up possibilities derived through careful analysis tied into the physical experience of hearing sound. I have no real answers, just what I hope are legitimate observations that should be taken into acount. I still can't pinpont where the differences are coming from.

EDIT: Actually, I did include a 'hook line and sinker' in a post earlier, I think, and for that I apologize if it was taken the wrong way.

dragon1952

Would you then be inclined to switch out your cables for the ones you prefered during the test, even if they are Radio Shacks?

I already answered that question.

And by implying that my choices are based on my erroneous perceptions you are talking down to me. By implying that if the cables were unknown to me I would be able to make a more correct choice you are talking down to me. By implying that I am incapable of choosing my own preferences in my own way you are talking down to me and by implying that I'm hearing what I want to hear you are talking down to me. By challenging me to use the A/B test you are implying that my way is fallable and full of holes. You are implying that if the test isn't 'scientific' it is invalid. Your viewpoint isn't a new one , it's older than the hills, and it implies that people like me are dumbasses.

Edit: Oh yeah....and furthermore, you're also implying that I don't know what an A/B test is.

Whadyasay

I'm still not getting what's being implied. And I'm not talking down to anyone. Sorry if you feel that way, it wasn't my intent. I didn't even try to define the AB test, I just set up a possible scenario. I don't even know what a real AB test is, so I simply proposed this one. Does it not make sense? If my testing methods are clearly flawed, then they're flawed...they probably are in some areas. But I do think I've brought up some valid points. They may be old ones...but have they been proven wrong, or simply dismissed? I actually went into this subjectively, and came out of it not knowing where I stand on the matter. And if I'm told that I'm full of boloney, then it won't bother me. I'm just going by what I've heard....and tested. After the tests were over...I STILL thought I heard differences, so I'm just trying to figure out what's causing it, and if it can be controlled, repeated, and applied...and yes, how much it should cost if manufactured.

Here's an observation, and not an implication: This is making you angry...so I'll simply apologize for that and stop.

2+2

So Whatyasay, Polkmanics test OK with ya? I think that would help alot of people....but wonder if it could convince you seeing as how there would be no "measurements"....?

You should also try your analysis with some amps that sound different...I would be very curious to see if there is a measurable sonic difference since differences in amps appear to be of same order of magnitude (i.e. relatively subtle) as differences in cables......of course, I am assuming that you believe amps sound different....maybe you dont...

Whadyasay

I'm sure that amps would sound different unless they used the exact same electronic components in the same values and such. There's a lot more going on in amplifiers in terms of capacitors, resistors, heat dissipation and such. Heck, two of the same amplifiers can measure slightly different because of the tolerances in the components that are specifically designed to do something to the audio/electrical signal...at least to amplify it, if not change it tonally, per se (that's why you determine which value to use) rather than pass it along unaffected and unamplified, like wire. I wasn't testing amps, I was testing cables of the same guage with the same amp/player/speaker.

Has anyone got that I wasn't just plugging wires into an oscilloscope and checking the readings? I was testing it using the information that we use, the sound coming from speakers making waveforms in the air. Perhaps something chemically in our brains is picking up things that the electonics can't measure. I can totally see the possibilities (at least conceptually) of this. But if this can't be explained or quantified...how can it be accurately designed into a cable and priced accordingly? I can't scientifically prove how much I love someone or how much they love me...I just know it and don't have to prove it. But can you control the amount of love that's relayed by a cable? Probably not...so don't charge us for it.

2+2

Oh, I was just suggesting measuring different sounding amps to verify that your measurements and equipment have the capacity to measure the nuance changes....that's all. After all, it would be rather silly to state that you cant measure any changes in a cable if you cant measure sonic differences in an amp either right? It would be a good test for your equipment....cuz like you said, amps should sound different...at least that has been my experience so far...

shiu

Hello Polkmaniac, if I understood correctly, you could pick out your cables 10 out of 10 times. I would like to know the length of the cables you used for the tests.

I would guess that if you keep the cables to not longer than 1m, its R,L,C, should not change the signals much. If the cables are long enough, then one should be surprised to find cables of different impedance characteristics may, to some sensitive ears, sound different. Impedance due to L & C are frequency dependent. Even R is, to a lesser extent. Higher frequencies would be affected more.

shack

Originally posted by Whadyasay
But if this can't be explained or quantified...how can it be accurately designed into a cable

Spoken like a true "tech" guy.

How about listening and trial and error. The majority of the "Boutique" Cable Mfgs aren't necessiarly engineers/technicians first but are audio enthusiasts who happen to have some technical expertice.

Originally posted by Whadyasay
and priced accordingly?

The market decides the price. (with influence from marketing)