Michael Fremer accepts Randi's Challenge

dudeinaroom

WilliamM2 wrote: »

What excuses? I have done the tests, I have compared cables. I was just explaining the difficulty of doing it at home. A difficulty none of you will admit to.....

look at post 207 pay attention to the bold part

Yashu

You just can't trust humans... I can trust machines to measure, and I can trust the human ear and auditory section in the brain to have the ability to hear amazing things, but I can't trust the owner of that brain to understand it, or properly, honestly report EVERYTHING, without any bias.

I, and all the audiophiles that I am personally acquainted with, are not on a crusade to "convert" the uninitiated. We already know what we can or cannot hear. I am on a crusade to get the best music reproduction that I can afford

I agree to this right here... I have a goal to afford better than what I have, while being happy with what I have. I KNOW there are faults, and I have heard better elsewhere, but I still enjoy music. If I have the chance to make a change for the better, I am not going to miss that chance.

Sami

hearingimpared wrote: »

Sorry flawed! Why? Why wouldn't a statement like, "I like the way cable B sounds over cable A" be an acceptable answer.

We could do it that way, no problem.

Play cable A, then B. Tell me which sounds better.

Then we play A and B in random order, you tell me which one sounds better. I'll mark down your answer. Repeat until 90% confidence level has been achieved, or minimum of 100 times.

Based on your answers we could scientifically determine if your claim that cable x (A or sounds better was true or false.

DarqueKnight

Wow. All that plugging/unplugging. I hope the gear used in these tests have some sturdy jacks.:p

Sami

heiney9 wrote: »

OMFG, that is the most retarded thing I have ever heard. If I prove to you cables make a difference then you will be a believer. WTF, DUDE? .

What's so hard to understand about that? If William can't hear a difference but you can prove that you can, he will accept that cables make a difference although he can't hear it. Simple as that.

Ricardo

treitz3 wrote: »

Went over my head, my bad.:o

That's fine; I'll let THIS ONE go.

heiney9

dudeinaroom wrote: »

I didn't know HTRookie was new????

I wasn't talking about HTRicardo, I was making a sarcastic statement (agreeing w/Ricardo) about Special K.

Sarcasm doesn't come across to well in written form .

H9

heiney9

Sami wrote: »

What's so hard to understand about that? If William can't hear a difference but you can prove that you can, he will accept that cables make a difference although he can't hear it. Simple as that.

You and William should share the same padded room. That is the most absurd logic I have ever heard. If you don't get that, then you never will. You better run along, Tinkerbell is calling you.

H9

Sami

heiney9 wrote: »

You and William should share the same padded room. That is the most absurd logic I have ever heard. If you don't get that, then you never will. You better run along, Tinkerbell is calling you.

H9

You're wrong and insults are not going to help you on this one.

If someone claims to be able to do something and proves it to you, you can't accept that it can be done because you can't do it?

JimBRICK

dorokusai wrote: »

I only buy gear based on what other people say.

I only buy gear Mark tells me to:cool:

dudeinaroom

I only buy what I can afford:eek:

treitz3

Ricardo wrote: »

That's fine; I'll let THIS ONE go.

hehe.

"What excuses?"

WilliamM2 wrote:

....I was just explaining the difficulty of doing it at home.

.....but to be honest, there is no way for me to do a true blind test on my own rig, as I have to swap the cables myself

....As far as Polkfest, I'm sorry I did not have time to attend, I do have a job, and also run a business out of my home. My employer does not allow vacations between Sept. 15 and Dec. 15, as that is our busiest time of the year.

Excuses like these.

WilliamM2 wrote: »

A difficulty none of you will admit to.

huh? Please clarify.

WilliamM2 wrote: »

BTW, did you do controlled cable tests at Polkfest? If not, what's your point?

No, we don't have to. It would be a waste of our time because we already know what they can do. My point is that we would be happy to personally show you whatever kind of test that you would like to see [hear] if you attended. Quite frankly, you are just annoying the cr*p out of me [I'm sure "us" would be appropriate as well] with your refusal to do any testing, or attend any testing, or any kind of offering that we give to you to possibly show you the light, and yet you ramble on and on about how we are all incorrect with the observation that SC's do not make any difference at all. Basically, my point is to try my best to stop the rambling of incorrect "beliefs" via your mouth [keyboard] about a subject that we know to be true. Everybody can't be wrong.

WilliamM2 wrote: »

If someone, anyone, could pass a controlled test, it would prove that there are differences in the sound of cables. Of course I would still be unable to hear it, never said I would be able to, just that I would believe that cables could make a difference.

This furthers my point. [note that which is highlighted]

That said, this is a post of my first observations of hearing a change in my rig regarding speaker cables posted on another forum I hang out on....

"As most of you know through my posts, I have had/tried eight different sets of speaker wire/cable in my various rigs. I have never heard a discernible difference in any of them.

Enter Audioquest CV-8's [with upgraded 72v battery packs] to route 1 of Sparky [to the full spectrum of the Focal's]. Within two seconds, I knew I was onto something sweet. After 16 seconds, I was literally jumping up and down for joy!!! I finally heard what you guys hear when it comes to speaker cables! This time I did not have to strain to hear any differences, this was noticeable no matter where you were located in the room.

My initial observances were that sounds that were always there before, sounded more natural. More like I was actually there in the recording studio. Now, when I finally stopped jumping up and down for joy...I sat my butt down in the sweet spot. Whoa! Now, this was the biggest improvement. Instead of hearing a sound stage to where the lead singer was 1/2 on the right speaker and 1/2 on the left speaker, the lead singer was now directly in between the two speakers and now moved from one side of the mic to the other. Too cool! I guess I heard precise imaging for the first time in my rig, as the speakers seemed to disappear. That was definitely unexpected, but more than welcome. The depth of the singers and instruments also deepened a little bit.

The thing I like most about these speaker cables is that when TFM-75 [another member of the other forum] and I were listening to the same song we had heard twice before in the morning, a "new" instrument was playing along. Never knew it was even there before. In going thru a lot of my favorite tracks and songs that I have heard a million times on all sorts of formats, I notice people talking in the background on some of Pink Floyd's tracks, guitar plucks and slides, subtle drumming that was apparently always there, just didn't have quite enough in my rig to bring all these sounds out before."

Now, TFM-75 and I both heard the same thing. I got them from EarlyB about two months ago [Thanks Early! ] and I am extremely happy with the purchase and what the speaker cables have done for my system. Now, my question to you.

How can I be so specific as to what is/has changed regarding sound if their is no difference? How can many other folks who have participated in the cable swap program provide such detailed specifics regarding speaker cables if they make no difference?

New sounds that weren't there before, a change in the imaging and improved bass seem to be the most common changes that my local cat's and online audiophiles seem to observe. Some of these folks have NEVER talked to one another, yet their observations are similar. How can that be if they make no difference?

Think about that for a while before you make your rebuttal post.

RuSsMaN

Just checking in to see if the horse was still dead, or you guys had come to a consensus yet.

Carry on, I'll check back in around post 350 or so.

Sami

treitz3 wrote: »

Think about that for a while before you make your rebuttal post.

treitz, if you feel so strongly about the difference between the Audioquest cable and others you have tried, what would be the problem then to do a blind test? Surely you could identify the AQ cable easily. That's the whole point of this thread, to prove it, not "but I know I hear a difference".

WilliamM2

Quite frankly, you are just annoying the cr*p out of me [I'm sure "us" would be appropriate as well] with your refusal to do any testing, or attend any testing, or any kind of offering that we give to you to possibly show you the light, and yet you ramble on and on about how we are all incorrect with the observation that SC's do not make any difference at all.

You have difficulty reading, don't you? I have done testing, including double blind testing. You refuse to do testing because you already "know". Talk about a closed mind.

I have stated that if anyone could prove it in a controlled test, I would admit there is a difference, whether or not I can hear it. My my is open to the possibility.

Why has no one done this in the history of audio? Right now it looks like it is because they can't. If they did, the debate would be over.

New sounds that weren't there before, a change in the imaging and improved bass seem to be the most common changes that my local cat's and online audiophiles seem to observe. Some of these folks have NEVER talked to one another, yet their observations are similar. How can that be if they make no difference?

More anecdotal evidence, big deal. Although they may have never talked to each other, I'm am sure they read on the internet and magazines just like you and I. The description of the changes you heard is almost exactly the same as every other I've read, and I'm sure you read some of them too. But that couldn't' have possibly influenced what you think you heard?

ka7niq

DarqueKnight wrote: »

To each his own, but I require no such validation to enjoy music.
.

Of course you don't, for you have 'special powers' that kinda go with your territory.
Why not set up a cable difference test at the next Polk Fest, and you can demonstrate these 'special powers' for all to see ?

WilliamM2

Sami wrote: »

treitz, if you feel so strongly about the difference between the Audioquest cable and others you have tried, what would be the problem then to do a blind test? Surely you could identify the AQ cable easily. That's the whole point of this thread, to prove it, not "but I know I hear a difference".

Funny thing is, I currently have Audioquest and BJC cables in my system, both highly recommended here, but they think I've never tried them.:rolleyes:

dudeinaroom

WilliamM2 wrote: »

You have difficulty reading, don't you? I have done testing, including double blind testing. You refuse to do testing because you already "know". Talk about a closed mind.

I have stated that if anyone could prove it in a controlled test, I would admit there is a difference, whether or not I can hear it. My my is open to the possibility.

Why has no one done this in the history of audio? Right now it looks like it is because they can't. If they did, the debate would be over.



More anecdotal evidence, big deal. Although they may have never talked to each other, I'm am sure they read on the internet and magazines just like you and I. The description of the changes you heard is almost exactly the same as every other I've read, and I'm sure you read some of them too. But that couldn't' have possibly influenced what you think you heard?

WilliamM2 wrote: »

Funny thing is, I currently have Audioquest and BJC cables in my system, both highly recommended here, but they think I've never tried them.:rolleyes:

why do you have them if they don't make a difference??? Oh yeah why don't you read post 207, pay attention to the bolded part, or is because I am making a point you choose to ignore me?

WilliamM2

why do you have them if they don't make a difference??? Oh yeah why don't you read post 207, pay attention to the bolded part, or is because I am making a point you choose to ignore me?

I have them beecause I like the build quality, good shielding, etc, and the price was right at the time...a little pride of ownership as well.

As far as post #207, what point did you make? Not a very scientific test, you knew which cable you were listening to. As far as what you heard? the same thing you have read everyone else claim they heard, wow, big suprise there.

I was actually just ignoring you, since you felt it neccessary earlier to keep mentioning that my system may not be resolving enough, the lamest argument ever, especially when you were using a reciever, and you claim you heard a difference.

Ricardo

ka7niq wrote: »

Of course you don't, for you have 'special powers' that kinda go with your territory.
Why not set up a cable difference test at the next Polk Fest, and you can demonstrate these 'special powers' for all to see ?

Well, for sure you won't be there :rolleyes:

Ricardo

http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?t=58512

Yashu

http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2007/hearing-1010.html

Here is an article that talks about some of the things I have been talking about. Now, if the differences can be measured by common equipment, then like I said, the ear has the POTENTIAL to pick that up and the brain has the chance to perceive that difference.

Just more fuel for the fire I guess.

dudeinaroom

WilliamM2 wrote: »

I have them beecause I like the build quality, good shielding, etc, and the price was right at the time...a little pride of ownership as well.

As far as post #207, what point did you make? Not a very scientific test, you knew which cable you were listening to. As far as what you heard? the same thing you have read everyone else claim they heard, wow, big suprise there.

I was actually just ignoring you, since you felt it neccessary earlier to keep mentioning that my system may not be resolving enough, the lamest argument ever, especially when you were using a reciever, and you claim you heard a difference.

Butt munch I was using an Adcom gfa 555, and gfp 555 at that time. And no I did not know which cable was playing because my wife was changing them back and forth and some times not at all, and I could tell the difference every time no 75% or 90% but every time.

dudeinaroom

WilliamM2 wrote: »

....I was actually just ignoring you, since you felt it neccessary earlier to keep mentioning that my system may not be resolving enough, the lamest argument ever, especially when you were using a reciever, and you claim you heard a difference.

I have no Idea of what you have that is why I said "may" if you would read through the thread in post 169 you would have know I had the Adcoms at 1 time. I also asked in that thread what you were running as to not make assumptions.

dudeinaroom

read before you type you won't look like as much of an asshat

reeltrouble1

The test the test the test..................you have to do the test. you have to do a scientific test, you hear me.........

oh brother what a broken record........
we never do silly things like this at Polkfest's just not what the event is all about. never has been never will be


Of course we did do that cable swap program for years........

RT1

WilliamM2

Butt munch I was using an Adcom gfa 555, and gfp 555 at that time.

Sorry, no need to get so exited that you need three posts to spout off. I misread the bit about 5.1

I like Adcom, and have used it in the past. I'm currently running SDA-1C's with RDO's and upgraded crossovers, powered by a Denon POA-2400 amp. Preamp is an Onkyo PR-SC885P, but previously for two channel, and when I last compared cables, I was running my Marantz CD player direct to the amp.

Maybe not the best setup, but certainly resolving enough.

Yashu

You are shaming such nice speakers with mid-fi gear... it's a wonder why you are such a skeptic No offense of course, but you have such strong opinions for someone that has barely dipped their toes into 2 channel.

dragon1952

treitz3 wrote: »

I don't think I have ever had that happen, but this is the second time lately this was mentioned.

Curiosity makes me want to ask what changed? Temp./ humidity w/ ribbons, cat hair/dust on electrostat's, lower current supply from overloaded electrical system, door open/shut, other half's mouth running, AC on when it wasn't on before, open window, ambient background noises, drinking alcohol, tubes not warm gear not warmed up, moved furniture/plants, different genre of music or was it possibly your ears readjusting to and from conditions that were either low/loud prior to listening as compared to the day before.

???

It has happened to me several times. I remember sitting there one night in particular thinking that it couldn't sound any better than that. And it never did again. That was several systems ago. I think it has to do with mood, the alignment of the stars and what you had for dinner....not necessarily in that order.

WilliamM2

You are shaming such nice speakers with mid-fi gear...

I only listed two pieces of gear. Have you ever heard either of the 2 peices of the gear I listed? What a Putz.