Don Richard Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 Complete, total, and utter nonsense. 12 gauge copper wire will pass any audio signal that man can hear to a loudspeaker. More information? It seems to me that you could use more information yourself concerning the electrical properties of conductors. The only veil that I can discern is between your perception of the facts and reality. Lets agree to disagree then Don. No, let's not. Every time someone who does not understand something loses a factual argument with someone who does, it seems that they pull this "let's agree to disagree" BS. You may disagree with an opinion that another has, but when you "disagree" with facts that are supported by real science you simply appear foolish. That's my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fastlayne Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 So according to his experience, up to the time of publication in 1996, experienced listeners could consistently hear a significant audible difference between cables, however seldom. If those were the pioneers of the truly improved cables, has the industry grown to provide more consumers an "audible difference"? What has happened since 1996 is that cable manufacturers have been buying advertising in the audiophool periodicals and the editors/writers of these publications have been promoting these pieces of wire as audio components, which they absolutely are not. And people who do not know any better buy into this crap. ... I'll need to reread Dunlavy's findings, but I don't think endorsed by name those cables he found to be superior. There is no denying the ad sales have grown considerably and I'm certain many of them are way overpriced, partly in order to pay for the advertising. When you look at the sum total of their parts, there is no way to justify some of these prices from my perspective. If the cables Dunlavy liked are the ones that cost more than my speakers, I don't care how good they sound I'm not buying them. What has also happened is innovators have found ways to provide quality cables and kept the prices down with direct marketing and no advertising. Some of these might even be improvements on those designs Dunlavy found to be superior. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Richard Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 I'll need to reread Dunlavy's findings, but I don't think endorsed by name those cables he found to be superior. You had better reread the findings, because no one he tested could reliably ID casbles. This is what he said: Oh yes, we have heard of golden-eared audiophiles who claim to be able to consistently identify huge, audible differences between cables. But when these experts have visited our facility and were put to the test under carefully-controlled conditions, they invariably failed to yield a score any better than chance. For example, when led to believe that three popular cables were being compared, varying in size from a high-quality 12 AWG ZIP-CORD to a high-tech looking cable with a diameter exceeding an inch, the largest and sexiest looking cable always scored best - even though the CABLES WERE NEVER CHANGED and they listened to the ZIP Cord the entire time. Sorry, but I do not buy the claims of those who say they can always audibly identify differences between cables, even when the comparisons are properly controlled to ensure that the identity of the cable being heard is not known by the listener. We have accomplished too many true blind comparisons with listeners possessing the right credentials, including impeccable hearing attributes, to know that real, audible differences seldom exist - if the comparisons are properly implemented to eliminate other causes such as system interactions with cables, etc. Indeed, during these comparisons (without changing cables), some listeners were able to describe in great detail the big differences they thought they heard in bass, high-end detail, etc. (Of course, the participants were never told the NAUGHTY TRUTH, lest they become an enemy for life!) Soooo - what were you reading? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Richard Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 If you are referring to blind testing, we all know that is a test of audible memory of which humans have very poor skills. Of all the senses, the one humans remember the most reliably is smell. Wow! That's really big news. However you are wrong again. It is interesting that you used the term "blind testing" then refer to the sense of smell as being the most recallable sense. The most reliable sense-memories humans possess are in fact from sight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 Well, I rather expected this thread to go this way, it always does... Let me re-iterate that I firmly believe that some of us can detect differences in various cables, caps, tubes, etc....no matter what science says. I cannot, but a single data point does not TRVTH make. I know I can certainly hear accurate and inaccurate, and am satisfied with that. Personally, I think its metaphysically absurd to tell another person what they hear or don't hear. When all is said and done, are they a figment of MY imagination, or am I one of THEIRS? [^o)] Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 >The most reliable sense-memories humans possess are in fact from sight. As I stated earlier, I certainly can't speak for the human race in general, but I can firmly state that in my experience smells set off more visual memories than vice-versa, and sound memories are second. Whilst this qualifies me for the funny farm to many, I am convinced that submerging in warm water sets off memories of the WOMB in me. The visual isn't there with it...it was dark in there. [8-)] Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hifi jim Posted April 22, 2009 Author Share Posted April 22, 2009 Complete, total, and utter nonsense. 12 gauge copper wire will pass any audio signal that man can hear to a loudspeaker. More information? It seems to me that you could use more information yourself concerning the electrical properties of conductors. The only veil that I can discern is between your perception of the facts and reality. Lets agree to disagree then Don. No, let's not. Every time someone who does not understand something loses a factual argument with someone who does, it seems that they pull this "let's agree to disagree" BS. You may disagree with an opinion that another has, but when you "disagree" with facts that are supported by real science you simply appear foolish. That's my opinion. You obviously wish to bicker about a decision I've already made, and has been agreed upon by others here. Cables sound different. I understand that you don't agree, but why not leave it at that and let us "crazies" get on with our discussion at hand? You don't wish to partake in any real listening as we have done, but rather argue blindly about science. And what "facts that are supported by real science" did you provide? We know that many cables measure differently, is this not an indication that they should sound different? You provided a link to one article about blind testing when we all know blind tests are totally inaccurate. If I provide reviews (of which there are countless on the web from both consumers and professionals), is that proof? Are all the consumers who have heard differences lying? Inept? Brainwashed? Is it only you who can decide what is fact and fiction? Is your engineering prowess better than those who have designed these cables? Are your ears better than ours, or the professional reviewers? Is every professional reviewer from around the globe influenced by their magazine, and the ads within such? This is getting to be a pretty big conspiracy Don. Are you sure the earth isn't flat? Open your mind, and your ears and perhaps you too will HEAR a difference. Shouting about science and conspiracies in a hobby that is ALL about listening, makes you appear foolish. That's my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hifi jim Posted April 22, 2009 Author Share Posted April 22, 2009 Well, I rather expected this thread to go this way, it always does... Unfortunately. []Personally, I think its metaphysically absurd to tell another person what they hear or don't hear. A logical and sensical quote, exactly why I like you Dave.Let me re-iterate that I firmly believe that some of us can detect differences in various cables, caps, tubes, etc....no matter what science says. Good point. Caps can measure the same but sound very different. Must be all those cap ads I've been seeing... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest " " Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 Also.....the exact same tube mAde in the eXact sAme fActory using the exAct sAme tooling sound different if they were made in the 60s than those made in the 80s beCause the ones made in the 60s Are Nos Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hifi jim Posted April 22, 2009 Author Share Posted April 22, 2009 Wow! That's really big news. However you are wrong again. It is interesting that you used the term "blind testing" then refer to the sense of smell as being the most recallable sense. The most reliable sense-memories humans possess are in fact from sight. "The most reliable sense-memories humans possess are in fact from sight". Well that is completely off the mark Don. Place one person in front of a classroom filled with 30 people for a minute and then remove them. Ask all thirty the color of his shirt, the color of his eyes, how tall was he? Lots of different answers will pop up and very few will match. Human sight is one of our least reliable sense memories. From the California Institute of Technology website: "Smell is often called the sense tied most closely to human memory, profoundly influencing people's ability to recall past events and experiences." But I'd rather talk about cables... http://pr.caltech.edu/periodicals/336/articles/Volume%205/02-10-05/memory.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fastlayne Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 How can those same golden ears be trusted when giving their opinions on anything to do with audio? Apparently I should trust my own ears. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Richard Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 "We have accomplished too many true blind comparisons with listeners possessing the right credentials, including impeccable hearing attributes, to know that real, audible differences seldom exist" There again he chooses "seldom" instead of "never". I wonder if he had an audiologist test the listener's hearing or if it was his non-professional opinion they had impeccable hearing. Maybe they just had said and written good things about his speakers, so that gave them the right credentials with impeccable hearing. It is easy to hear the difference between 24 gauge "speaker" wire and 16 gauge wire at 20 ft. lengths. This has been well documented and is due to the higher resistance of the smaller wire. No one can seem to tell the difference between 12 gauge and any other expensive cable. That answer reminds me of the time an attorney contacted our office at the time that we had a renowned hydrocarbon chemist working with us. He wanted to know if the gas release that a client of his had breathed while working at a local refinery was harmful. After researching the makeup of the gas in question, the chemist met with the attorney and told him that there was no known effect in humans from breathing it. The attorney then said, "Aha! There are effects, but they are not known yet?' As for your questions concerning whether tests were run on various 12 and 10 AWG, I suggest you contact Mr. Dunlavy for that information. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winchester21 Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 I guess part of finding the ultimate sound is questioning your own observations. Something I read in this thread got my attention. The Nordost blue heavens "over emphasis" on highs. I had found my jolida CD player a tiny bit shrill in the high range on certain CDs such as Roy Buchanan. I was considering changing the tubes in the Jolida to try something different. Maybe I will play this track with both sets of wire and see if it makes any difference. I only noticed this since I switched to tubes-but the mids and the setup overall are so good that I am afraid to screw with it. Now this has me thinking- doubting what I have previously stated about the cables. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Richard Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 You obviously wish to bicker about a decision I've already made, and has been agreed upon by others here. Cables sound different. I understand that you don't agree, but why not leave it at that and let us "crazies" get on with our discussion at hand? You don't wish to partake in any real listening as we have done, but rather argue blindly about science. And what "facts that are supported by real science" did you provide? Quite a few scientific facts were provided by myself and others. We know that many cables measure differently, is this not an indication that they should sound different? At the frequencies and impedances involved here, the answer is no. You provided a link to one article about blind testing when we all know blind tests are totally inaccurate. So you are saying that non-blind tests are more accurate? LOL If I provide reviews (of which there are countless on the web from both consumers and professionals), is that proof? No. Are all the consumers who have heard differences lying? Inept? Brainwashed? Possibly, though misled and uninformed is more likely. Is it only you who can decide what is fact and fiction? No, but note that I am not the only one saying that these cables are snake oil. Is your engineering prowess better than those who have designed these cables? Probably, but some of them may be competent engineers just trying to make a fast buck. Many are probably not engineers at all. Are your ears better than ours, or the professional reviewers? I'm beginning to wonder. Is every professional reviewer from around the globe influenced by their magazine, and the ads within such? Are all of the engineers that discount these cables based on their professional knowledge on the subject incompetent? This is getting to be a pretty big conspiracy Don. Are you sure the earth isn't flat? There is a conspiracy that threatens to flatten the earth? I wouldn't like that at all. Shouting about science and conspiracies in a hobby that is ALL about listening, makes you appear foolish. Without the devices developed through scientific research, none of us would be listening to any electronically reproduced music. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hifi jim Posted April 22, 2009 Author Share Posted April 22, 2009 Well that was pretty much the non-informative reply that I thought you'd come up with. So you are saying that non-blind tests are more accurate? LOL As Russ and myself pointed out earlier, somethings like tubes, caps and cables have subtle differences that are best heard and realized through long term listening.Quite a few scientific facts were provided by myself and others. Where? I must have missed that. We know that many cables measure differently, is this not an indication that they should sound different? At the frequencies and impedances involved here, the answer is no. Says who? Are all the consumers who have heard differences lying? Inept? Brainwashed? Possibly, though misled and uninformed is more likely. You don't have much faith in your fellow brethren. Is it only you who can decide what is fact and fiction? No, but note that I am not the only one saying that these cables are snake oil. Yes, but seeing how this is a billion dollar industry, yes billion, backed by professional and consumer testimonies I think the burden of proof falls on you. I have listened and heard a difference on several occasions. What are your experiences? Do you have extensive listening comparisons? Have you conducted your own blind tests (since you feel this is a good way to determine differences)? Or are you prejudging what something sounds like based on your own limited scientific knowledge? Is your engineering prowess better than those who have designed these cables? Probably, but some of them may be competent engineers just trying to make a fast buck. Many are probably not engineers at all. Probably? You don't even know who these engineers are, but you think you know more? Is that the definition of arrogance? I'm glad you think some of them are competent enough to make a fast buck, at least your faith in humanity isn't completely diluted. Are your ears better than ours, or the professional reviewers? I'm beginning to wonder. You're obviously right Don, you have better hearing than all of us. You think pretty highly of yourself eh? Is every professional reviewer from around the globe influenced by their magazine, and the ads within such? Are all of the engineers that discount these cables based on their professional knowledge on the subject incompetent? Are they not the minority? Most whom have no experience, that is listening experience with audio. Critical listening is learned.Without the devices developed through scientific research, none of us would be listening to any electronically reproduced music. Are cables not developed through scientific research? Don, you were wrong about human senses, although you made yourself out to be an expert in that field too [:$]. Isn't it possible you're wrong here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fastlayne Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 ...Soooo - what were you reading? "are there really any significant audible differences between most cables that can be consistently identified by experienced listeners? The answer is simple: very seldom!" The simplest answer would have been "no", if that was the truth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hifi jim Posted April 22, 2009 Author Share Posted April 22, 2009 "are there really any significant audible differences between most cables that can be consistently identified by experienced listeners? The answer is simple: very seldom!" The simplest answer would have been "no", if that was the truth. Excellent point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fastlayne Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 ....As for your questions concerning whether tests were run on various 12 and 10 AWG, I suggest you contact Mr. Dunlavy for that information. Alas, he passed away in 2007. I don't want to nitpick all of his test findings and some of my comments about it are rhetorical or tongue-in-cheek, but words have meanings. "Indeed, during these comparisons (without changing cables), some listeners were able to describe in great detail the big differences they thought they heard in bass, high-end detail, etc. (Of course, the participants were never told the NAUGHTY TRUTH, lest they become an enemy for life!)" Only "some listerners" fell for it? He didn't want to tell them so he just published the findings in a news letter instead. Much better for them to learn they were duped that way. If I ran such a test and every single listener failed to consistently tell the difference from one cable or the other, I would state it in those simple terms. He didn't. Maybe another way to look at the cable industry is it has contributed to keeping 2-channel going. We are already in a minority and the option of downloading mp3 files to playback through some device connected via USB does not appeal to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
russ69 Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 Where is that popcorn smiley? Peace, Russ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
russ69 Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 Hifi Jim, I think you just have to forget about the "non-belivers". We know it takes the right cabling to get the most out of a HI-FI system and we have done this with no small amount of investment of time and money. The other side has never tried, nor are they interested in trying. They can't measure it and that's that. We can try to help people to make changes to improve their system but you just can't help someone that doesn't want help. I'm afraid I put those people in the "all amps sound the same" group. Why spend any money when my system is perfect? For those of us that have spent a lifetime working on improving our systems and finally found a way to tune the sound without changing expensive conponents, we feel insulted by the less informed when they say we are full of BS. I can't count the times a guy asked for some help that a $100 cable will fix and someone posts that's BS and you need a new amp/pre/CD player instead. Hey, we can just try to help. You can't force the horse to drink........... Thanx, Russ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.