The Great Debate (again)

Early B.

I want to address, once again, the issue of whether power cords or interconnects or speaker cables or isolation components, etc. make a difference, but from a macro perspective. There is an article in the March issue of Stereophile magazine where the author mentions the concept of "auditory memory" as potentially one of the main reasons why people perceive music differently and why some people hear changes and why some people don't hear them. I thought it was an interesting notion because, generally speaking, some people have better memories than others, so it isn't hard to imagine that auditory memory may be analogous to ordinary memory. (Hmmm -- sounds like an interesting research project.)

Similarly, a question I have for Polkies is whether you hear music or feel it. I surmise that all of us do both, but to varying degrees, and it affects our ability to perceive changes in our system. For instance, when I make major changes in my system, I ask my wife whether it sounds better. Her response is always the same -- the system change either makes her "feel" the music more or it doesn't. She doesn't use terms like, "it has more detail," or "the bass is better." Rather, she talks about whether or not the music elicits a greater emotional response for her. On the other hand, I listen to changes in music quite differently. It's the classic left brain vs. right brain thing going on here.

There's a third group of people I refer to as the "brotherhood of the boombox." These guys don't hear system changes at all because most systems sound alike to them. To them, every amp sounds the same. They'll use science to argue that a power cord doesn't make any difference, but won't try it for themselves. They would fall under the category of "left-brained listener with low auditory memory."

Here's my hypothesis -- the extent to which people can perceive differences in power cords, interconnects, etc. is based primarily on their level of auditory memory due mainly to the degree to which one feels music or hears it. In short, memory and perception drive our listening experience. Thus, the self-proclaimed audiophile is likely to have a strong auditory memory based on either a "good ear" and/or a heightened sensability for feeling music. The abilities to remember and perceive music are pre-programmed or "hardwired" in us; however, one can "learn" to become a better music listener through repetition (it's the same way we commit things to memory).

Any thoughts?

PolkThug

Early B. wrote:

Here's my hypothesis -- the extent to which people can perceive differences in power cords, interconnects, etc. is based primarily on their level of auditory memory due mainly to the degree to which one feels music or hears it.

For your hypothesis to be true, you would first have to prove that a power cord makes an audible difference. Good luck.

ND13

JUST SAY NO!!!!!


To the cable/wire debate.

I have yet to see anyone that doesn't have an open mind change their position(no matter the side they are on).

I used to think that cables and wires didn't/couldn't make much of a difference, other than the obvious(like using a 12 gauge wire instead of a 24 gauge for longer runs and so on). That is until I had a rig with enough resolution to hear the differences.

I still believe there is common sense to be used when purchasing cables/wires. I've found that sometimes a $60 IC does just as good, if not better than some of the $300 ICs. YMMV due to synergy.

Nuff said, carry on.:)

Skynut

My memory won't let me remember the reason I am responding to this post let alone remember how my system sounded an hour ago when I shut it off to change my wires. (Let alone the burn in period.)
Therefore I don't do a/b comparrisons with cables.
I also can not afford to change all them at once so I haven't tried it yet.
I actually plan to do so when I can find the 20 some odd cables I need at a good price. Until then I am just trying to memorize my system's sound in hopes that I can notice a difference when the time comes.

AsSiMiLaTeD

please not again...

steveinaz

I think it's an interesting topic.

My opinion is that just like you have certain people who see the "rainbow effect" on DLP tv's, you have some people who can hear subtle differences in audio. I don't understand why that concept is so hard to conceive?

There's a ton of things that affect how we perceive audio signals; the shape of our ears, the listening room, personal audio preferences, materials, topology, etc. The list goes on and on.

Check this out. Sit at your listening position and put some music on. Now, take your index fingers and push the outer edge of each ear forward, just a mere 1/8th of an inch....pretty enlightening huh? MAJOR difference in treble/midrange. This only addresses why people with ears shaped a certain way may find certain speakers "hot" in the treble, or fatiging. Alot of times we completely forget/dismiss the physiological impact.

...and that's just 1 of thousands of varibles. Bottom line, as always; if YOU can hear a difference---then there IS a difference.

I dismiss the "placebo effect" most of the time (not to say that it doesn't play a part with some listeners) because sometimes the "phsycology" doesn't add up. For instance, lets say you're replacing a cable with a cable that you believe to be of better quality, only to find you don't like the supposedly "better" cable---where's the placebo effect? This has happened to me on many occasions. If the placebo effect worked, we would always like our upgrades, right?

The problem is, people try to explain the unexplainable. Anytime a human is brought into the equation, millions of varibles have just been introduced. The vast majority of those varibles, indefineable.

ND13

steveinaz wrote:

There's a ton of things that affect how we perceive audio signals; the shape of our ears, the listening room, personal audio preferences, materials, topology, etc. The list goes on and on.

Check this out. Sit at your listening position and put some music on. Now, take your index fingers and push the outer edge of each ear forward, just a mere 1/8th of an inch....pretty enlightening huh? MAJOR difference in treble/midrange. This only addresses why people with ears shaped a certain way may find certain speakers "hot" in the treble, or fatiging. Alot of times we completely forget/dismiss the physiological impact.

...and that's just 1 of thousands of varibles. Bottom line, as always; if YOU can hear a difference---then there IS a difference.

And BINGO was his name-o!!!

Wardsweb

The only thing that really matters is if you like your stereo. What others think is irrelevant. That is unless you have low self esteem and need the accolades from others, then post cognitive dissonance is a must. Also, we can not negate the importance of the phycho-acoutic affect. If you think it will sound better, it will, because what is reality but what we think it is. It's all in your mind.

PolkThug

To get back on track, I can barely remember anything my wife says. I think I have selective auditory memory.

steveinaz

That's called P.S.A.D.M.

Psuedo Spousal Audio Defense Mechanism, in laymans terms, "wife-hearing."

LOL!!

Early B.

PolkThug wrote:

For your hypothesis to be true, you would first have to prove that a power cord makes an audible difference. Good luck.

No, I don't. I just have to demonstrate that some people perceive a difference, which we all know to be true.

But my point is not whether a power cord or anything else actually or scientifically makes a difference, it is more about how we remember and perceive music.

steveinaz

Ed Zachry.

Our perception of things IS our reality, is it not?

aaharvel

just enjoy the music guys, and revel in the fact that when it comes to hi-fi we're smarter and more aware than 90% of the population out there.

PolkThug

Early B. wrote:

No, I don't. I just have to demonstrate that some people perceive a difference, which we all know to be true.

But my point is not whether a power cord or anything else actually or scientifically makes a difference, it is more about how we remember and perceive music.

I agree, it is true that some people perceive a difference. I am not arguing whether they make a difference or not either, I'm just looking at the formulation of your hypothesis.

Your hypothesis is that auditory memory is resposible for perceived differences, correct?

If the differences are perceived, and real, then auditory memory very well could have something to do with those perceptions.

If the differences are only perceived, and not real, then auditory memory has nothing to do with the perceptions.

Once again, I'm just looking at this from a prove/disprove hypothesis standpoint. Those are my thoughts.

bikezappa

• It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong.

Feynman

Plain and simple. Wheres the experiment?

Peter

bikezappa

Or put another way.

"The exception tests the rule." Or, put another way, "The exception proves that the rule is wrong." That is the principle of science. If there is an exception to any rule, and if it can be proved by observation, that rule is wrong.

Feynman

The key word here is observation.

steveinaz

per-cep-tion: the mental grasp of objects, qualities, concepts, ideas, etc., by means of the senses; awareness, comprehension.

Note the word "senses."

Early B.

PT -- memory and perception have nothing to do with reality. We remember and perceived things that aren't real all the time.

We hear a song and it is stored in our brain as a memory. If we hear the same song, but with something that has changed (e.g., a power cord), we compare it to our stored memory of that song and realize (or not) a change has occurred, for better or worse. All I'm saying is that some people have a better memory for music than others, which could account for the various perceptions and ideas people have about differences (or not) in power cords, speaker cables, etc. Then I asked myself the question, "How do we remember music?" and suggested that we recall music by what we hear as well as by the memories of the feelings the music invoked.

steveinaz

bikezappa wrote:

• It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong.

Feynman

Plain and simple. Wheres the experiment?

Peter

INCORRECT: The very basis of a "theory" is that it has the potential to be proven either right or wrong, hence it is a THEORY not a fact.

Theory: considerable evidence to support
Hypothesis: inadequate evidence to support

madmax

I agree with your hypothesis. I have heard X number of systems that I know are good, really good. How can I tell? I literally get goosebumps. My own system can do this sometimes. One setting off, maybe a different cable, any number of very small changes and I'm sitting their totally uninvolved. It is a VERY thin line. This is where that super expensive cable or maybe that piece of worthless foam stuck under the edge of the CD player or maybe even that magic brick I sometimes sit on top of the power transformer makes a difference. Good equipment is most important obviously. By good I mean good, not necessarily expensive.
madmax

F1nut

bikezappa wrote:

Or put another way.

"The exception tests the rule." Or, put another way, "The exception proves that the rule is wrong." That is the principle of science. If there is an exception to any rule, and if it can be proved by observation, that rule is wrong.

Feynman

The key word here is observation.

There is an exception to every rule. Therefore, the above statement is flawed by nature.

PolkThug

Early B. wrote:

PT -- memory and perception have nothing to do with reality.

They should.

Early B. wrote:

We remember and perceived things that aren't real all the time.

Agreed.

Early B. wrote:

We hear a song and it is stored in our brain as a memory. If we hear the same song, but with something that has changed (e.g., a power cord), we compare it to our stored memory of that song and realize (or not) a change has occurred, for better or worse. All I'm saying is that some people have a better memory for music than others, which could account for the various perceptions and ideas people have about differences (or not) in power cords, speaker cables, etc. Then I asked myself the question, "How do we remember music?" and suggested that we recall music by what we hear as well as by the memories of the feelings the music invoked.

Agreed.


If we all just have our own little reality, then it is worthless to discuss your hypothesis, because the answer could be true or false depending on an individual's "reality".

steveinaz

I like my Dads take:

"Arguing passionately that the earth is flat, while a commendable effort, doesn't make it so..."

heiney9

If this makes any sense.....I notice the most difference between IC's/gear when listening to the most familiar music. The more familiar I am with the particular music the more apparent the change/non-change. I hear and feel the music and listen for certain characteristics of musical piece. One thing that really stands out in most popular music is the "snap" of a snare drum. Where's the leading edge, how fast does it attack, what are the decay characteristics? Another area I listen for is the "sizzle" and "crispness" of a cymbal. It should be metallic and have proper decay characteristics, not dull and abrupt. Bass should sound natural, weighty and be well extended.

In order to properly evaluate each part of your system you have to listen for cues in the recordings you are familiar with and the characteristics you like most about the recordings and listen for those to change or not change. When you’re familiar enough with your favorite recordings then start swapping gear/cable in and out and see if there is a difference. I have a set of about 30-40 songs that are in heavy rotation and are what I consider excellent recordings (recordings that emphasize characteristics that are pleasant to me as well as being well recorded/mastered). Example: Perhaps I like a much "livelier" sound than most, so I would choose recordings that have an open dynamic sound. I would choose my cables, etc accordingly. For me the snap and attack of the snare or just well recorded drums in general are very important whether it's Jazz, Rock, Pop, and Blues etc. There are certain elements that a great system does very well even if each great system is a bit different.

The problem may be for those who don't perceive change is they aren't familiar enough with the source material; they don't listen cognitively for what they like about the music/recording which makes it difficult to perceive any change. Having said that I feel your system has to be good enough to make these minute changes audible because in most cases the changes are very subtle. Also, I don't assume just because you swap something out it's going to change. Sometimes they are very similar other times there is just no difference.

So it comes down to being a critical listener, being familiar with the source material and having a system that is high enough up the chain to
be able to reproduce subtle differences if there are any.

H9

bikezappa

steveinaz

Your reply is exactly what Feynman is saying. We agree. Read it again.

Peter

bikezappa

There is an exception to every rule. Therefore, the above statement is flawed by nature.
__________________
There are laws of physics that are true. That is these laws are in agreement with experiment. If you can do an experiment that shows the law in wrong then you could win a Noble Prize.

steveinaz

bikezappa wrote:

steveinaz

Your reply is exactly what Feynman is saying. We agree. Read it again.

Peter

My bad.

bpadget

The only way to absolutely resolve this question would be by conducting controlled scientific experiments with lots of different systems and listeners. That would involve a double blind test that used various levels of system with different sets of interconnects. Neither the listeners nor the the test monitor can know which systems or IC's are being used. If the cable manufacturers had performed these kinds of tests and demonstrated a difference, I'm sure it would be all over their advertising. On the other hand, if testing like this didn't show a difference, we would never hear about it from the manufacturers.

Early B.

Zero wrote:

Ok - this will not be entirely related to the current discussion but I've always felt I had a great audible memory since I was a lil' one. Sometimes an experience will come back and slap me in the face.

Right now I'm listening to a pair of LSi-7's again.. I almost forgot just how good the LSi series is. That always freakin happens... damn.

This is exactly what I'm talking about. You appear to have an innate ability for remembering music, and it is something you recognized even as a child.

Cool.

That explains, in part, why you're a freakin' audio junkie.:p

Early B.

bpadget wrote:

The only way to absolutely resolve this question would be by conducting controlled scientific experiments with lots of different systems and listeners. That would involve a double blind test that used various levels of system with different sets of interconnects. Neither the listeners nor the the test monitor can know which systems or IC's are being used. If the cable manufacturers had performed these kinds of tests and demonstrated a difference, I'm sure it would be all over their advertising. On the other hand, if testing like this didn't show a difference, we would never hear about it from the manufacturers.

No, no. There's a much easier way. This question is about memory and perception, not about different systems, ICs, etc. Just take both camps -- the "believers" and "non-believers" and test each group's auditory memory. My hypothesis states that the believers will have a better auditory memory than the non-believers.

bikezappa

bpadget
That's correct. I'd be very interested in these type of experiments and test results. Let's do them. I can help.