Spearker cables..fact or fiction?
Comments
-
Bose is what makes Bose sound like ****. I don't think that there is any great conspiracy there.-Ignorance is strength -
-
Rodney King wrote: »U rang?
Sup Rodney!Polk Audio Surround Bar 360
Mirage PS-12
LG BDP-550
Motorola HD FIOS DVR
Panasonic 42" Plasma
XBOX 360[/SIZE]
Office stuff
Allied 395 receiver
Pioneer CDP PD-M430
RT8t's & Wharfedale Diamond II's[/SIZE]
Life is one grand, sweet song, so start the music. ~Ronald Reagan -
This thread is amazing. It has now morphed again ... into a positive and meaningful audio discussion. 'goes to show that if trolls are ignored long enough, they will go away!
-
man this is a huge thread, gizmodo done a test using martin logan speaker cables versus a copper coat hanger, no1 could tell the diff in a blind test
-
....Political Correctness'.........defined
"A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t-u-r-d by the clean end."
President of Club Polk -
man this is a huge thread, gizmodo done a test using martin logan speaker cables versus a copper coat hanger, no1 could tell the diff in a blind test
Fortunately, I have the decoder ring with me today, so I was able to understand your post.
Since you seem to like to believe what you read, here's something for you to ponder.
"Now back to the question of the blinded testing. Here is what the now publisher (Robert Harley) of one of the major magazines wrote a few years ago....
Quote:
Blind tests nearly universally appear to indicate that no differences exist between electronics, cables, capacitors, etc. In fact, one infamous test "revealed" that no sonic differences exist between power amplifiers. Mark Levinson, NYAL Futterman OTL tube monoblock, NAD, Hafler, and Counterpoint power amplifiers were all judged to be sonically identical to each other and to a $219 Japanese receiver (footnote 7). This very test, wielded by the objectivists as proof that all amplifiers sound alike, in fact calls into question the entire blind methodology because of the conclusion's absurdity. Who really believes that a pair of Futterman OTL tube amplifiers, a Mark Levinson, and a Japanese receiver are sonically identical? Rather than bolster the objectivist's case, the "all amplifiers sound the same" conclusion of this blind test in fact discredits the very methodology on which hangs the objectivist's entire belief structure.
If differences do exist between components, why don't blind tests conclusively establish the audibility of these differences? I believe that blind listening tests, rather than moving us toward the truth, actually lead us away from reality.
First, the preponderance of blind tests have been conducted by "objectivists" who arrange the tests in such a way that audible differences are more difficult to detect. Rapid switching between components, for example, will always make differences harder to hear. A component's subtleties are not revealed in a few seconds or minutes, but slowly over the course of days or weeks. When reviewing a product, I find that I don't really get to know it until after several weeks of daily listening. Toward the end of the review process, I am still learning aspects of the product's character. Furthermore, the stress of the situationusually an unfamiliar environment (both music and playback system), adversarial relationship between tester and listener, and the prospect of being ridiculedimposes an artificiality on the process that reduces one's sensitivity to musical nuances.
Going beyond the nuts and bolts of blind listening tests, I believe they are fundamentally flawed in that they seek to turn an emotional experiencelistening to musicinto an intellectual exercise. It is well documented that musical perception takes place in the right half of the brain and analytical reasoning in the left half. This process can be observed through PET (Positron-Emission Tomography) scans in which subjects listening to music exhibit increased right-brain metabolism. Those with musical training show activity in both halves of the brain, fluctuating constantly as the music is simultaneously experienced and analyzed. Forcing the brain into an unnatural condition (one that doesn't occur during normal music listening) during blind testing violates a sacrosanct law of science: change only one variable at a time. By introducing another variablethe way the brain processes musicblind listening tests are rendered worthless."Political Correctness'.........defined
"A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t-u-r-d by the clean end."
President of Club Polk -
...."He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you." Friedrich Nietzsche
-
If someone doesn't see it or hear it, why does this person state we are all nuts because we do?
Why why why?
God please help me understand these people.
Speakers
Carver Amazing Fronts
CS400i Center
RT800i's Rears
Sub Paradigm Servo 15
Electronics
Conrad Johnson PV-5 pre-amp
Parasound Halo A23
Pioneer 84TXSi AVR
Pioneer 79Avi DVD
Sony CX400 CD changer
Panasonic 42-PX60U Plasma
WMC Win7 32bit HD DVR -
Fortunately, I have the decoder ring with me today, so I was able to understand your post.
Since you seem to like to believe what you read, here's something for you to ponder.
"Now back to the question of the blinded testing. Here is what the now publisher (Robert Harley) of one of the major magazines wrote a few years ago....
Quote:
Blind tests nearly universally appear to indicate that no differences exist between electronics, cables, capacitors, etc. In fact, one infamous test "revealed" that no sonic differences exist between power amplifiers. Mark Levinson, NYAL Futterman OTL tube monoblock, NAD, Hafler, and Counterpoint power amplifiers were all judged to be sonically identical to each other and to a $219 Japanese receiver (footnote 7). This very test, wielded by the objectivists as proof that all amplifiers sound alike, in fact calls into question the entire blind methodology because of the conclusion's absurdity. Who really believes that a pair of Futterman OTL tube amplifiers, a Mark Levinson, and a Japanese receiver are sonically identical? Rather than bolster the objectivist's case, the "all amplifiers sound the same" conclusion of this blind test in fact discredits the very methodology on which hangs the objectivist's entire belief structure.
If differences do exist between components, why don't blind tests conclusively establish the audibility of these differences? I believe that blind listening tests, rather than moving us toward the truth, actually lead us away from reality.
First, the preponderance of blind tests have been conducted by "objectivists" who arrange the tests in such a way that audible differences are more difficult to detect. Rapid switching between components, for example, will always make differences harder to hear. A component's subtleties are not revealed in a few seconds or minutes, but slowly over the course of days or weeks. When reviewing a product, I find that I don't really get to know it until after several weeks of daily listening. Toward the end of the review process, I am still learning aspects of the product's character. Furthermore, the stress of the situationusually an unfamiliar environment (both music and playback system), adversarial relationship between tester and listener, and the prospect of being ridiculedimposes an artificiality on the process that reduces one's sensitivity to musical nuances.
Going beyond the nuts and bolts of blind listening tests, I believe they are fundamentally flawed in that they seek to turn an emotional experiencelistening to musicinto an intellectual exercise. It is well documented that musical perception takes place in the right half of the brain and analytical reasoning in the left half. This process can be observed through PET (Positron-Emission Tomography) scans in which subjects listening to music exhibit increased right-brain metabolism. Those with musical training show activity in both halves of the brain, fluctuating constantly as the music is simultaneously experienced and analyzed. Forcing the brain into an unnatural condition (one that doesn't occur during normal music listening) during blind testing violates a sacrosanct law of science: change only one variable at a time. By introducing another variablethe way the brain processes musicblind listening tests are rendered worthless."
Man, don't go there. Folks were getting along for change....
Let's argue about things that nobody is going to change their minds about via PM or, better yet, over beers. -
thats a new way to think about it, i think i'l take them blind tests as blind opinions from now on . Never realy thought about the rapid switching and using tests thats gona give the same result regardless
-
slowpolky wrote:man this is a huge thread, gizmodo done a test using martin logan speaker cables versus a copper coat hanger, no1 could tell the diff in a blind test
What a load of crap......:rolleyes:"Just because youre offended doesnt mean youre right." - Ricky Gervais
"For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't believe, no proof is possible." - Stuart Chase
"Consistency requires you to be as ignorant today as you were a year ago." - Bernard Berenson -
Hillbilly61 wrote: »Man, don't go there. Folks were getting along for change.... Let's argue about things that nobody is going to change their minds about via PM or, better yet, over beers.
Not sure how Jesse's post could be considered... a flame war starter. Very well thought out I think.- Not Tom ::::::: Any system can play Diana Krall. Only the best can play Limp Bizkit. -
There is a series of vintage Polks that also have a light bulb in the crossover.
That bulb would have to be in series, correct, with the driver ?
More current, filament heats up, limits current, etc ?
With incadescent bulbs being phased out, and energy-efficient fluorescent bulbs being phased in, that'll kind of put a kink in the ol' crossover network won't it ?
Sal Palooza -
mrbigbluelight wrote: »With incadescent bulbs being phased out, and energy-efficient fluorescent bulbs being phased in, that'll kind of put a kink in the ol' crossover network won't it ?
Incandescent won't be going away. Hopefully, it'll be the hazmat bulbs, if thats what you're referring to. Pretty good chance they'll be outlawed before long.
Do yourself a favor people...avoid hazmat bulbs like your life depends on it. Because it does!! Those things are such bad news! If you've got them, start trying to figure out how to dispose of them if you can. They're about like PCB laden transformers. Once you have them, the only way to dispose (properly) is to pay thru the nose...
Think about what'd be like to loose everything you own in a house fire, know the hazmat bulb may well bring you that possibility and just say NO! And tell your friends to say NO too, to the hazmat bulb. Sorry (a little) for the OT...
CoolJazzA so called science type proudly says... "I do realize that I would fool myself all the time, about listening conclusions and many other observations, if I did listen before buying. That’s why I don’t, I bought all of my current gear based on technical parameters alone, such as specs and measurements."
More amazing Internet Science Pink Panther wisdom..."My DAC has since been upgraded from Mark Levinson to Topping." -
Incandescent won't be going away. Hopefully, it'll be the hazmat bulbs, if thats what you're referring to. Pretty good chance they'll be outlawed before long.
Do yourself a favor people...avoid hazmat bulbs like your life depends on it. Because it does!! Those things are such bad news! If you've got them, start trying to figure out how to dispose of them if you can. They're about like PCB laden transformers. Once you have them, the only way to dispose (properly) is to pay thru the nose...
Think about what'd be like to loose everything you own in a house fire, know the hazmat bulb may well bring you that possibility and just say NO! And tell your friends to say NO too, to the hazmat bulb. Sorry (a little) for the OT...
CoolJazz
Where a tin foil hat when cleaning.
http://www.hazmat.floridadisaster.org/2009/pressrelease-D4.pdfPlease. Please contact me a ben62670 @ yahoo.com. Make sure to include who you are, and you are from Polk so I don't delete your email. Also I am now physically unable to work on any projects. If you need help let these guys know. There are many people who will help if you let them know where you are.
Thanks
Ben -
OK topped with a tin foil hat:)Please. Please contact me a ben62670 @ yahoo.com. Make sure to include who you are, and you are from Polk so I don't delete your email. Also I am now physically unable to work on any projects. If you need help let these guys know. There are many people who will help if you let them know where you are.
Thanks
Ben -
What a load of crap......:rolleyes:
i don't think i've ever seen a copper clothes hanger in my life. i doubt a steel hanger could provide the same quality sound as copper wire...especially over any distance...i wish i had my software handy that gives details about metal conductivity...In-Car:
Head Unit: Sony MEX-1GP
Door speakers: Infinity Kappa 680.9cs
Rear speakers: Polk db690
Subwoofers: Memphis Audio 15-M3124
Amps: Pioneer GM5300T, Kenwood KAC 6020, Memphis Audio MCD1.1100
In-Home:
Harmon/Kardon AVR 230
Harmon/Kardon DVD 101
Yamaha RX-V995
Bose 161
Bose 901
Polk FXi30 -
Agreed...What a load of crap......:rolleyes:
...and so is this!Fortunately, I have the decoder ring with me today, so I was able to understand your post.
Since you seem to like to believe what you read, here's something for you to ponder.
"Now back to the question of the blinded testing. Here is what the now publisher (Robert Harley) of one of the major magazines wrote a few years ago....
Quote:
Blind tests nearly universally appear to indicate that no differences exist between electronics, cables, capacitors, etc. In fact, one infamous test "revealed" that no sonic differences exist between power amplifiers. Mark Levinson, NYAL Futterman OTL tube monoblock, NAD, Hafler, and Counterpoint power amplifiers were all judged to be sonically identical to each other and to a $219 Japanese receiver (footnote 7). This very test, wielded by the objectivists as proof that all amplifiers sound alike, in fact calls into question the entire blind methodology because of the conclusion's absurdity. Who really believes that a pair of Futterman OTL tube amplifiers, a Mark Levinson, and a Japanese receiver are sonically identical? Rather than bolster the objectivist's case, the "all amplifiers sound the same" conclusion of this blind test in fact discredits the very methodology on which hangs the objectivist's entire belief structure.
If differences do exist between components, why don't blind tests conclusively establish the audibility of these differences? I believe that blind listening tests, rather than moving us toward the truth, actually lead us away from reality.
First, the preponderance of blind tests have been conducted by "objectivists" who arrange the tests in such a way that audible differences are more difficult to detect. Rapid switching between components, for example, will always make differences harder to hear. A component's subtleties are not revealed in a few seconds or minutes, but slowly over the course of days or weeks. When reviewing a product, I find that I don't really get to know it until after several weeks of daily listening. Toward the end of the review process, I am still learning aspects of the product's character. Furthermore, the stress of the situationusually an unfamiliar environment (both music and playback system), adversarial relationship between tester and listener, and the prospect of being ridiculedimposes an artificiality on the process that reduces one's sensitivity to musical nuances.
Going beyond the nuts and bolts of blind listening tests, I believe they are fundamentally flawed in that they seek to turn an emotional experiencelistening to musicinto an intellectual exercise. It is well documented that musical perception takes place in the right half of the brain and analytical reasoning in the left half. This process can be observed through PET (Positron-Emission Tomography) scans in which subjects listening to music exhibit increased right-brain metabolism. Those with musical training show activity in both halves of the brain, fluctuating constantly as the music is simultaneously experienced and analyzed. Forcing the brain into an unnatural condition (one that doesn't occur during normal music listening) during blind testing violates a sacrosanct law of science: change only one variable at a time. By introducing another variablethe way the brain processes musicblind listening tests are rendered worthless."
I find very odd people trying to discredit science to prove their point when in fact it is science, engeneering and technical logic that brought about ALL of those fine systems we are all listening to... NOT magic or faith. Blind testing is FACT. If the brain is actually fully working, the more reason for one to be able to detect changes. Is A & B equal or are they different? Blind testing is an accurate way to prove ya or na, you can not simply turn around and deny facts because they do not match your beliefs! The stove is hot! The fact that you have FAITH will not change the fact that you will get burned, this is a FACT!!! Blind tests results are FACTUAL and you can not deny the FACT!!
Cheers
DARE TO SOAR:
Your attitude, almost always determine your altitude in life -
Agreed...
...and so is this!
Blind tests results are FACTUAL and you can not deny the FACT!!
Cheers
The fact is they are not factual.:p
Let's' not take the emotional factor of music out of the equation. -
Agreed...
...and so is this!
I find very odd people trying to discredit science to prove their point when in fact it is science, engeneering and technical logic that brought about ALL of those fine systems we are all listening to... NOT magic or faith. Blind testing is FACT. If the brain is actually fully working, the more reason for one to be able to detect changes. Is A & B equal or are they different? Blind testing is an accurate way to prove ya or na, you can not simply turn around and deny facts because they do not match your beliefs! The stove is hot! The fact that you have FAITH will not change the fact that you will get burned, this is a FACT!!! Blind tests results are FACTUAL and you can not deny the FACT!!
Cheers
Acutely oversimplified! It's crap!"Appreciation of audio is a completely subjective human experience. Measurements can provide a measure of insight, but are no substitute for human judgment. Why are we looking to reduce a subjective experience to objective criteria anyway? The subtleties of music and audio reproduction are for those who appreciate it. Differentiation by numbers is for those who do not".--Nelson Pass Pass Labs XA25 | EE Avant Pre | EE Mini Max Supreme DAC | MIT Shotgun S1 | Pangea AC14SE MKII | Legend L600 | BlueSound Node 3 - Tubes add soul! -
The stove is hot! The fact that you have FAITH will not change the fact that you will get burned, this is a FACT!!!
Care to explain how some folks can walk across a bed of red hot coals in their bare feet and not suffer any burns?Blind tests results are FACTUAL and you can not deny the FACT!!
Really? What's factual about Mark Levinson, NYAL Futterman OTL tube monoblock, NAD, Hafler, and Counterpoint power amplifiers being judged to be sonically identical to each other and to a $219 Japanese receiver?Political Correctness'.........defined
"A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t-u-r-d by the clean end."
President of Club Polk -
No tech kid has a lot to learn...Please. Please contact me a ben62670 @ yahoo.com. Make sure to include who you are, and you are from Polk so I don't delete your email. Also I am now physically unable to work on any projects. If you need help let these guys know. There are many people who will help if you let them know where you are.
Thanks
Ben -
-
Care to explain how some folks can walk across a bed of red hot coals in their bare feet and not suffer any burns?QUOTE]
I can explain the physics of this experiment. You could also ask your father who as I understand from your older posts is a physicist.
The ablity to walk on hot stones in based on the low thermal conductivity and heat capacity of the rocks. The rocks used during these experiments are volcanic and they have a very low heat capacity and thermal conductivity. Not all rocks have the same properties.
Let me explain it another way if you bake an angle food cake at 350 degrees in a metal pan everything is at the same temperature, correct. However, if you touch the cake you will not get burned. If you touch the metal pan you will get burned. The difference that allows you to touch the cake or walk on rocks without getting burned is based on the thermal properties of cake and metal and rocks. -
One other point, the people who charge you money for the experience of walking on rocks are liars because they never tell you that they have heated up special low density rocks.
There are people in the world like this, be skeptical, and don't buy all the bull ****. -
One other point, the people who charge you money for the experience of walking on rocks are liars because they never tell you that they have heated up special low density rocks.
There are people in the world like this, be skeptical, and don't buy all the bull ****.
thanks bikezappa i'm still in bed and already i learned something!In-Car:
Head Unit: Sony MEX-1GP
Door speakers: Infinity Kappa 680.9cs
Rear speakers: Polk db690
Subwoofers: Memphis Audio 15-M3124
Amps: Pioneer GM5300T, Kenwood KAC 6020, Memphis Audio MCD1.1100
In-Home:
Harmon/Kardon AVR 230
Harmon/Kardon DVD 101
Yamaha RX-V995
Bose 161
Bose 901
Polk FXi30 -
CRESCENDOPOWER wrote: »You are wrong one time in a thousand shots.
I have learned a lot from my sisters and brothers here. I will say that I have been proven wrong more than one time in a thousand;) Use your ears:)Please. Please contact me a ben62670 @ yahoo.com. Make sure to include who you are, and you are from Polk so I don't delete your email. Also I am now physically unable to work on any projects. If you need help let these guys know. There are many people who will help if you let them know where you are.
Thanks
Ben -
The ablity to walk on hot stones in based on the low thermal conductivity and heat capacity of the rocks. The rocks used during these experiments are volcanic and they have a very low heat capacity and thermal conductivity. Not all rocks have the same properties.
Interesting and makes sense. I've never seen it live, so I wasn't aware that they used rocks. I always thought they walked on the actual hot coals.
Of course, this has no bearing on blind tests being useless.
Political Correctness'.........defined
"A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t-u-r-d by the clean end."
President of Club Polk -
It is however related to the same emotional faith the cable manufacturers are creating to sell their so called high end cablesInteresting and makes sense. I've never seen it live, so I wasn't aware that they used rocks. I always thought they walked on the actual hot coals.
Of course, this has no bearing on blind tests being useless. DARE TO SOAR:
Your attitude, almost always determine your altitude in life -
It is however related to the same emotional faith the cable manufacturers are creating to sell their so called high end cables
In my heart and soul there is faith. When it comes to my ears there is no faith but accuracy. My MIT ICs and Speaker cables blow any other IC or speaker cable that I've heard away.
Have you tried any "so called" high end cables in your rig. If not your opinions are worthless; if so then would you share with us your findings and results please?
This discussion has been closed.