Cable comparison data

jinjuku

I would like to see something more than:

Throw stuff on the wall and see what sticks approach.

concealer404

Matt, here's my question to you:

Why does sight matter? Considering that this is a hobby that centers around improvements in sound, whether it's perceived and not really there or not, (placebo effect) the subject may hear an improvement.

Regardless of whether or not it's measurable, or even real, the subject still may hear an improvement. If they do, then the experiment is a success for that person.

If i like the way my system sounds with cables that are blue, vs. the way they sound with the same cables with a red sheathing, then the blue is better. Even if they really aren't. I heard an improvement. My brain may have manufactured the improvement, but my level of enjoyment has increased. I don't listen to my system blindfolded normally, why would i introduce a different situation in order to test something? If human bias allows for an increase in enjoyment, is it really such a bad thing? This hobby isn't a science. It's based on enjoyment of an art form. Art =! science.

See where i'm going with this?

jinjuku

concealer404 wrote: »

Why exactly is the double blind test truly relevant, though?

Double blind testing is supposed to remove/reduce bias. I don't know if the person has to be blind folded. Maybe put everything behind an acoustically transparent screen.

The problems start when trying to figure out what configuration of components will let one tell a difference between both the line level and speaker level interconnects. What are good enough speakers, what are good enough amps, what are good enough sources. At what point can you definitively say "yep cables are going to be the weakest link".

jinjuku

concealer404 wrote: »

Matt, here's my question to you:

Why does sight matter? Considering that this is a hobby that centers around improvements in sound, whether it's perceived and not really there or not, (placebo effect) the subject may hear an improvement.

Regardless of whether or not it's measurable, or even real, the subject still may hear an improvement. If they do, then the experiment is a success for that person.

If i like the way my system sounds with cables that are blue, vs. the way they sound with the same cables with a red sheathing, then the blue is better. Even if they really aren't. I heard an improvement. My brain may have manufactured the improvement, but my level of enjoyment has increased. I don't listen to my system blindfolded normally, why would i introduce a different situation in order to test something? If human bias allows for an increase in enjoyment, is it really such a bad thing? This hobby isn't a science. It's based on enjoyment of an art form. Art =! science.

See where i'm going with this?

100% see where you are going with this and agree that it is right for you. I would like to deal with reality vs perception. Even if you do n of 10 and your guesses are statistically random then if I follow you would STILL enjoy the blue vs red cables after the fact (?).

concealer404

jinjuku wrote: »

Double blind testing is supposed to remove/reduce bias. I don't know if the person has to be blind folded. Maybe put everything behind an acoustically transparent screen.

The problems start when trying to figure out what configuration of components will let one tell a difference between both the line level and speaker level interconnects. What are good enough speakers, what are good enough amps, what are good enough sources. At what point can you definitively say "yep cables are going to be the weakest link".

When you listen to your system is it behind an acoustically transparent screen? Or are you blindfolded?

I'll be the first to admit that i buy some gear instead of others based on looks. It may be childish or shallow, but for example, i HATE the way NAD gear looks. It will never sit in my system.

Now, i'm not saying that i bought my cables because they're pretty, i'm simply saying that a double blind test is not a direct parallel with how people listen to their systems, and therefor, isn't really relevant.

Here's a relevant test:

"Here's cable A. Ok, you heard it, now let's try cable B. Which do you like better? Cable B? Ok, that cable is better for you."

Of course, it shouldn't be that quick, allow yourself time to absorb all the nuances and so forth, but THAT would be relevant. Double blind? No.

As for your second paragraph? There isn't a definite point. Different for every system, every set of ears. We can only offer guidance based on opinion. Nothing more.

concealer404

jinjuku wrote: »

100% see where you are going with this and agree that it is right for you. I would like to deal with reality vs perception. Even if you do n of 10 and your guesses are statistically random then if I follow you would STILL enjoy the blue vs red cables after the fact (?).

Well, that's the thing... "reality," that being what you can see on a piece of paper, has no place in this hobby. Or at least, it shouldn't.

The reality that should matter, is what the subject "percieves." If the subject perceives a difference, then the difference becomes reality to the only person that matters, that being the owner of the system/listener/subject.

As for red vs blue cables, that's just an example. I, for one, would do enough research that i wouldn't spend money for cables of a different color if they were truly the same. After all, i'm not rich enough to buy cables based on such a trivial judgement. It was really just an example to illustrate that it doesn't matter WHY someone likes a cable better. If they do, they do, and there's no need to discuss it further, and certainly no need to tell that person that they're wrong for liking said cable based on what someone else thinks, or can read on a piece of paper.

Recently, i went from one red cable to another red cable. For the record, the new cables are WAY uglier than the previous cables.

BlueFox

jinjuku wrote: »

I'm still waiting for Mr. Engineer to list his testing and measurement protocol.

Reading comprehension is a weak point, I see. Testing is personal experience, measuring protocol is using your ears. All I have asked for is what cables, and electronics, were used to reach the conclusion, "Cables make no difference." Nothing more, nothing less.

jinjuku

BlueFox wrote: »

Reading comprehension is a weak point, I see. Testing is personal experience, measuring protocol is using your ears. All I have asked for is what cables, and electronics, were used to reach the conclusion, "Cables make no difference." Nothing more, nothing less.

I understand what you said. I just don't call that testing. Not meant to be mean spirited in any way.

heiney9

test 1 (tst)
n.
1. A procedure for critical evaluation; a means of determining the presence, quality, or truth of something; a trial: a test of one's eyesight; subjecting a hypothesis to a test; a test of an athlete's endurance.
2. A series of questions, problems, or physical responses designed to determine knowledge, intelligence, or ability.
3. A basis for evaluation or judgment: "A test of democratic government is how Congress and the president work together" (Haynes Johnson

jinjuku

heiney9 wrote: »

test 1 (tst)
n.
1. A procedure for critical evaluation; a means of determining the presence, quality, or truth of something; a trial: a test of one's eyesight; subjecting a hypothesis to a test; a test of an athlete's endurance.
2. A series of questions, problems, or physical responses designed to determine knowledge, intelligence, or ability.
3. A basis for evaluation or judgment: "A test of democratic government is how Congress and the president work together" (Haynes Johnson

I think we are talking about different testing. I am referring to a reproducible measurement. DIY screen paint is a good example. At Home Theater Shack the Black Widow screen paint is 4 parts Valspar Ultra Premium Enamel with 1 part Auto Air Aluminum. This mix should produce a gray screen that is spot on 6500 everytime (+/- a few degrees of allowed deviation). They have a scenario where they make certain claims. One being that the paint will always turn out neutral. That means that any other 3rd party should be able to independently mix this and then measure and end up with the same result.

If you like what you like that is fine. Every one is welcome to their opinion.

What you posted I believe lends itself more to what Matt and Myself are speaking to: Critical Evaluation.

F1nut

So, in the interest of science, tell us the cables used to reach the conclusion, “Cables make no difference”. Nothing more, nothing less. Just some data about what speaker cables were compared that resulted in the conclusion cables make no difference.

So juju, what part of "tell us the cables used to reach the conclusion" are you not understanding? I mean, it is a simple question, one that any 3 year old could answer, so can we take it that your refusal to answer the simple question means that you have no experience with different cables? Yeah, thought so. Troll.

jinjuku

F1nut wrote: »

So juju, what part of "tell us the cables used to reach the conclusion" are you not understanding? I mean, it is a simple question, one that any 3 year old could answer, so can we take it that your refusal to answer the simple question means that you have no experience with different cables? Yeah, thought so. Troll.

Between some Monster 400i's and my DIY cables the only difference I could tell was price.

Between a $4 Monoprice TOSLink and some $99 Monster TOSlink cable again the only difference was price.

Between a $8 Parts-Express (6 foot) HDMI and a $130 Monster (8ft) HDMI nada.

This was for a friend that I did a PSB system for. Some one almost snowed him on the importance of cables.

I made a bet with him. If he could pick out any of the Monster stuff vs the cables I made and the TOSlink/HDMI cables that I brought over I would buy him the Monster. 2 hours later all the Monster was returned.

I have heard BJC RCA's and couldn't tell a difference. Yes this was with someone switching them while I left the room.

jinjuku

F1nut wrote: »

So juju, what part of "tell us the cables used to reach the conclusion" are you not understanding? I mean, it is a simple question, one that any 3 year old could answer, so can we take it that your refusal to answer the simple question means that you have no experience with different cables? Yeah, thought so. Troll.

All you ever prove with the way you post is what an immature child you are.

concealer404

jinjuku wrote: »

Between some Monster 400i's and my DIY cables the only difference I could tell was price.

Between a $4 Monoprice TOSLink and some $99 Monster TOSlink cable again the only difference was price.

Between a $8 Parts-Express (6 foot) HDMI and a $130 Monster (8ft) HDMI nada.

This was for a friend that I did a PSB system for. Some one almost snowed him on the importance of cables.

I made a bet with him. If he could pick out any of the Monster stuff vs the cables I made and the TOSlink/HDMI cables that I brought over I would buy him the Monster. 2 hours later all the Monster was returned.

I have heard BJC RCA's and couldn't tell a difference. Yes this was with someone switching them while I left the room.

Considering what you were comparing, i don't think any of us will say that we were surprised... so don't be surprised when everyone says exactly that.

jinjuku

concealer404 wrote: »

Considering what you were comparing, i don't think any of us will say that we were surprised... so don't be surprised when everyone says exactly that.

When some one offers to let me try a $7K cable that will make $7K of difference, that is when I will be surprised.

concealer404

jinjuku wrote: »

When some one offers to let me try a $7K cable that will make $7K of difference, that is when I will be surprised.

You don't need a $7k cable to hear a difference if you're willing to listen.

What you've listed is all bottom of the barrel stuff. All of it.

(EDIT)

Well, i shouldn't judge your homebrew cables. I haven't heard them, so i won't judge.

jinjuku

concealer404 wrote: »

You don't need a $7k cable to hear a difference if you're willing to listen.

100% willing to listen. It's the ROI I am critical of. Hey if Kimber wants to let me try some cables I will be all for it.

I will let you know what I think of Signal Cable. I can also get AQ from BB now.

concealer404

jinjuku wrote: »

100% willing to listen. It's the ROI I am critical of. Hey if Kimber want to let me try some cables I will be all for it.

I will let you know what I think of the Signal Cable's. I can also get AQ from BB now.

ROI?

You may need to go higher up the food chain than the entry level offerings from either company, just as a warning in advance. I don't know what your homebrew cables sound like.

That said, i'd think you would at least hear a difference. Whether for the better or for the worse to your ears, i can't answer.

jinjuku

concealer404 wrote: »

ROI?

You may need to go higher up the food chain than the entry level offerings from either company, just as a warning in advance. I don't know what your homebrew cables sound like.

That said, i'd think you would at least hear a difference. Whether for the better or for the worse to your ears, i can't answer.

Return on Investment (unless you are a billionaire and just don't care).