Interesting article, although it sounds like they did extensive listening to long sections of MUSIC, not just quick tones or 10 sec. clips, which is what many DBT apostles preach. It's still not fool proof because they all had a well established base line to work from. You don't always have that.

it's the "stevie nicks" syndrome. back in the day, you just assumed because she was a beautiful woman that she could sing beautifully too. i would agree with your point that when you see a beautiful object that happens to be a speaker, you want to have the object in your home and all but a few lucky people also have to consider the opinions of others in the household, so you will it to sound good, even if it may not be the best. how many tickets has stevie sold?

tom collins

Quote:
Blind tests are teh only really legit way to test stuff, if you are trying to find out, sound differences. If you want art, then ya gotta look. What the stuff looks like influences how it sounds, ain't reviewers filled with human frailtys, like the consumers?

Hey, help us out by posting your DBT routine when you audition gear and make buying decisions.

Or did you shop some other way?

Quote:
Blind tests are teh only really legit way to test stuff, if you are trying to find out, sound differences. If you want art, then ya gotta look. What the stuff looks like influences how it sounds, ain't reviewers filled with human frailtys, like the consumers?

If blind tests are "teh only really legit way to test stuff" please tell me why you seem to simply reject tests with results that run contrary to your beliefs?

You remember I brought to your attention the recent Boston Audio Society members (E. Brad Meyer and David R. Moran) DBT of standard CD vs. Hi-Rez audio which failed to demonstrate a difference between Hi-Rez and standard Redbookformats. However you seemed to completely brush asside the results when you responded:

"I have the DSD/SACD versions of several CD versions all the DDSD/SACD smoke the Cd only versions."

... and from there you proceeded to ramble on about HDTV and launched into yet another tired anti-Fremer rant.

DUP perhaps your player simply doesn't do Redbook CD proper justice, or maybe you're just fooling yourself due to you pro Hi-Rez bias? The BAS DBT test certainly suggests something of the kind, don't you think?

You see DUP if you're going to jump on the pro-blind test band wagon you can't just simply ignore the results of tests because they just happen to be a odds with your beliefs! That's hypocritical... and, ya' know, not scientific!

Now you've got him blowing spit bubbles, bjh.

DUP,

All is clear now.

If the blind test results fits with your personal experience and technology favorites then they're good. These are the legit tests.

If they don't then something was wrong. One doesn't have to give these tests much thought although throwing out a few "maybe"s doesn't hurt.

Thanks.

This is my first real post here and it's exactly what I've been reading about recently and that is double blind testing and the ability of an interconnect to make a difference in ones system. This may be old news here but the article I read from Audioholics pointed out how cables, as long as they are well made, will make no difference. Kind of scientific in areas but very well laid out.

My opinion is, the reason double blind testing, especially when dealing with cables of all kinds, will never be used by this magazine is because there is big money in copper wiring with pretty covers on it. And as we all know, money is what drives everything we do. If it was finally revealed that a $25 Monster Cable produced the same sound as a multi thousand dollar interconnect, the big manufacturers would have to raise their prices on all their other equipment to make up for the huge amount of lost revenue from cable sales.

I also found it rather telling that the founder of Stereophile thinks DBT is the way to go.

The thing is- almost eveything on the planet has some corrolation between looks and quality. You think that Porche looks that way solely to serve performance? (or BMW, Mercedes, whatever) Or any other luxury car? Or how about how food is presented? The list goes on and on. Sure- the danger is that it can look great but not perfom well, but you're taking it too far when you say that BECAUSE it looks nice it must be a scam. It just isn't how most things are.

I always find the most anti cables guys out there have almost never actually listened to anything OTHER than the cheap stuff they own. It's like they couldn't bear to actually do the test. The thing is, pricier cables usually DO sound better (although I've never tested nor heard the thousand dollar plus stuff). But the ICs I have that are $250 easily outplay and out perform the basic Monster stuff. That being said I don't like every expensive cable, by am long shot. Some I've put in and after a couple of songs I know it's not what I consider to be neutral, or maybe it lacks bass or dynamics or whatever. If that's the case I move on and don't buy it, no matter how pretty it looks! The Kimber silver stuff looks way cool, but personally I hate it (and yes it's pretty expensive too).

Bottom line is just go to a dealer and listen to some, or borrow it and decide for yourself. If you really think you are SO gullible and naive as to be hypnotically attracted to a cable just because it's pretty, well then you have mys sympathy. Most of us are mature and rational enough to ignore those features and LISTEN first! If we like what we hear and maybe we'll buy. If it looks nice on top of how it sounds that a bonus- NOT the reason why it gets bought. I mean, please...

dbowker has a good point. when i listened to a pair of speakers that i eventually bought, i heard a very smooth sound with a great top end. my dealer had custom made a set of cables for me from 3 strands of single strand copper for use with previous speakers. when i hooked my new speakers up to the custom wire, it sounded like there was a blanket over the speakers and especially the high range. dealer said try this nordost blue heaven (not expensive for nordost, but still $600). what a gigantic difference from top to bottom. someone with peanut butter in their ears could have heard the difference. i don't know how this compares to the over $1,000 stuff either, probably much more subtle improvements and questionable value, but i am sold on the difference nordost made in my system, and the same applied to the interconnects. i never thought i would pay over $200 just for interconnects, but holy moly, what a difference in detail and clarity. so, i would agree that a dbt of cables between a base line set like monster and a good quality upgrade could be worth a listen, what is there to lose except one's scepticism.

tom collins

I suggest that if you cannot clearly discern an appreciable improvement in your system when a new component is introduced that you not buy this component. If you need to resort to DBT to convince yourself that there is an improvement, the potential benefit is so small that it is not worth your money.

However, it makes sense that at the highest levels of recording and production that skilled, experienced trained listeners conduct every kind of test they can to eek out that last bit of perfection.

There is an interesting thread on audioholics? re Blind Testing cables.

A guy basically recreated the randi challenge in his home.
He was certain he would identify the differences, he couldn't.

Expectation bias is a very powerful. If one is consdering spending thousands on wire it is probably worth the hassle of blind testing. It might save money.

Bias and prejudice are indeed powerful. They also work both ways. Both the objectivist and the objectivist camps suffer from their effects and can delude themselves.

The classic objectivist fiasco occurred in the 1970's. Legions of objectivist lemmings convinced themselves that amps with decreasing THD and IM specs sounded better and better. The subjectivists staunchly maintained they sounded worse.

Ultimately audiophiles learned of transient IM. It was increasing as THD and IM decreased with application of negative feedback. This is what the subjectivists heard.

Lessons:

1) Rely on your ears.

2) We need to have a reason to measure something and to understand it before it can be measured. That is, subjective observation precedes objective quantification.

I strongly suspect that objectivists are deluding themselves in believing that there cannot be differences in cables. Similarly, subjectivists are deluding themselves that there are tremendous differences.

Elks, with their superior listening and reasoning skills, together with pointy antlers, know that the truth lies somewhere in between.

Now if only their hooves had opposable thumbs so that they could manufacture audio equipment. Imagine trying to assemble a length of cable . . .

I think part of the problem is the overuse of "night and day" differences when describing the sonics of some cables. While I do think the differences are most often subtle and not earth shattering, the double edge of that sword is that the magic lies in those nuanced differences--and that's where one cable might be excellent whereas another is just good. I have heard the systems of some cable non-believers, and after hearing their setups, it's no wonder that they are non-believers; their systems lack the resolution or ability to present the subtle cues that an excellent cable can reveal. I doubt anyone could pass a blind test with these systems.

I don't disagree with you, Elk.

But I wasn't really talking about measurements, only about listening w/o knowing which cable you are listening to.

Of course, short term blind testing has it's own problems but it can be a useful part
in the many faceted process of evaluation. I wouldn't have it be the final arbiter in my purchase decisions.

Quote:
But I wasn't really talking about measurements, only about listening w/o knowing which cable you are listening to.

I understand. You indeed have a good point; if you believe the pretty cables will sound better you may hear an improvement even if none exists.

My point is that the reverse is also true. If you are convinced that cables all sound the same you may hear no improvement even if there really is a difference.

Expanding on this, there are those that accept only what measurements say and will convince themselves of what they hear based on the measurements.

Bias is hard to avoid.

Quote:

Quote:
But I wasn't really talking about measurements, only about listening w/o knowing which cable you are listening to.

I understand. You indeed have a good point; if you believe the pretty cables will sound better you may hear an improvement even if none exists.

My point is that the reverse is also true. If you are convinced that cables all sound the same you may hear no improvement even if there really is a difference.

Expanding on this, there are those that accept only what measurements say and will convince themselves of what they hear based on the measurements.

Bias is hard to avoid.

I know guys on either side of that equation when it comes to chicks, too.

Apropos of nothing.

Elk, once again , we are in agreement, should I purchase some antlers? :-)

All this talk of antlers is making me horny.

Quote:
All this talk of antlers is making me horny.

Great Jeff!
If I may give my 2 cents, I can't & probably never will be able to afford expensive cables. That being said, most of you here have good points! Again, I think JA had good points about DBT in his "Watching the Detectives" AWSI article.
If you hear an improvement & can afford them, buy them. If not,don't that's it! While I'm fairly recent to the High End, I've considered myself an audiophile for awhile & have always said that my final audio "authority" are MY ears!!
Sometime soon I hope to be able to upgrade to some "anti-cables" for speakers & interconnects. If I hear an improvement I'll be happy, if not oh well!

quote:
"If I may give my 2 cents, I can't & probably never will be able to afford expensive cables. "
unquote

Anti cables replaced 3,000.00 speaker cables in my system.
My subjective opinion was that the anti's sounded better but I would likely fail a blind test.

I think the most money I ever wasted was on those cables, know I should sell them but I think I procrastinate because I feel it would be crooked to sell them.
I doubt cable manufacturers are bothered by such ethical questions.

In Texas we say "cable manufacturers are lower than a snake's belly in a wagon rut"

Every studio gives careful thought when choosing cables. Some use pretty exotic stuff. No one uses generic "cable".

They also go to great lengths in installation. For example, when wiring permanent connections it is common to see the ground pin of XLR's lifted on the load end of the connection, all grounds are equal length and attached to a common ground bar, etc.

They all know that room treatment is critical, something that we as a group don't like to acknowledge - probably because it isn't as fun to shop for it as a new CD player but can easily make a bigger difference.

Taken together such care makes a big difference.

For me, most wire sounds pretty much the same once a certain basic level is reached, this includes the interconnects that I make myself. Cheap stuff is awful and some of the specialty stuff is bad to my ear as well. Others seem to sound slightly different but not enough that I would spend more money on. Once in a while something "pops" and just sounds better. When this occurs I keep it.

I will never understand the big fights over wire. If you don't accept it matters, buy generic. If you enjoy the hunt and hear large differences, go for it. My bias is that if you need DBT to tell you which camp you are in, buy generic.

Quote:
What do the guys at Telarc use, versus the guys at BAS? If a cable needs to be only audible improvements on these highly "revelaing" systems. i thought these cables are advertized to improve the rez of a system? What system requirments are needed to make cables audible, maybe system with unstable amps and pre amps that respond to highly reactive cabling, like cables with high capacitance that screws with pre amp output ckts or amp input ckts? This argument that you only hear i"improvments" on certain highly revelaing systems is a weak one. Unstable amps and pre amps and other electroncis will be affected, I use the term affected, not improved...Better electronics are not disturbed by the unusal properties of magic cables. then what objective paramters are there for a "revealing" system. Seems WEAK, on this argument? You mean if i hook up a $10K cable in my non revealing system, it has no benefit? That would seem like a waste of $10K, cus' that buys a nice EMMLABS 2X SACD machine, I bet I can hear THAT!!! Cable fakery, is like politicans, they always have some non answer or reason something ain't so. If your electronics, are so poorly designed, and an AC cord changes how teh power supply section works, there is a problem, called poor design, or just plain crap. Line cords are rated for volts and ampactiy, ther is no sound in an AC cord, there are facny pictures of reptiles, and snake skin wrap, looks nice on magazine pages, in full color. and why do these $10K pieces of wire not even have a UL sticker, damn, for $3, I can get a cord with UL or ETL on it, it at least means it passed some kind of spec requirments? Let's see some BLIND tests between some of these magic wires, and let's see if some of these reviewers can really hear what they claim.....come on....Tara stopped advertsing, so what? They don't even know how to put teh proepr made in...sticker, oh yes they do, they peel and stick...is that called FRAUD. If they lie about where it's made, why would any of their other incredible claims be real? they can't even get the place of mfg right.....

You mention BAS and Telarc and then launch into an anti-cable rant!

The BAS DBT tests concerned the question of Hi-Rez vs. standard Redbook CD digital formats, it had nothing to do with cables. In particular their tests failed to demonstrate a difference under double blind controlled conditions between the formats.

Your attempts at avoiding the issue while not the least clever are nonetheless rather amusing. Instead of showing interest in the BAS study, giving it a critical examination to perhaps discover flaws that might well account for the discrepancy between their results and your beliefs, we see you running scared and ranting on in customary form!

Too funny!

Anyway DUP others, myself included, *did* dare to examine the BAS report. You'll be glad to hear that despite their having utilized a DBT methodology there was much about the work to question, a nearly endless list as it turns out; the report was discussed extensively at the Audio Asylum.

So rest easy delicate Prince, there's no BAS Boogie Man... you can take you head up from under the covers now!

Quote:

quote:
If I may give my 2 cents, I can't & probably never will be able to afford expensive cables.

Anti cables replaced 3,000.00 speaker cables in my system.
My subjective opinion was that the anti's sounded better but I would likely fail a blind test.

I think the most money I ever wasted was on those cables, know I should sell them but I think I procrastinate because I feel it would be crooked to sell them.
I doubt cable manufacturers are bothered by such ethical questions.

In Texas we say "cable manufacturers are lower than a snake's belly in a wagon rut"

It seems to me you have learned a good deal about yourself via your cable experience... let's hope that you've detected snake bellies from other sources besides cable manufacturers. If not them I'm afraid you're in for more painful discoveries down the trail.

OH BTW, you should count it amoungst your blessings that you "can't & probably never will be able to afford expensive cables", after all were it otherwise I'm gussing you'd be telling us not about a $3,000 mistake but rather about $30,000 mistake!

bjh,

"the cant afford" etc. quote was not mine.

It is obvious from reading your posts that you are intellectually limited so It is understandable you made such a mistake.

I suggest you take a reading /comprehension class at your local college . That might prevent you from embarasing yourself further.

At the very least you should read posts more carefully before making a fool of yourself.

The anti cables sound quite good with my watt/puppies and rowland amp fed by Transporter.

Quote:
bjh,

the cant afford etc. quote was not mine.
It is obvious from reading your posts that you are intellectually limited so It is understandable you made such a mistake.
I suggest you take a reading /comprehension class at your local college . That might prevent you from embarasing yourself further.

At the very least you should read posts more carefully before making a fool of yourself.

The anti cables sound quite good with my watt/puppies and rowland amp fed by Transporter.

Ah touch

Quote:
bjh,

the cant afford etc. quote was not mine.
It is obvious from reading your posts that you are intellectually limited so It is understandable you made such a mistake.
I suggest you take a reading /comprehension class at your local college . That might prevent you from embarasing yourself further.

At the very least you should read posts more carefully before making a fool of yourself.

The anti cables sound quite good with my watt/puppies and rowland amp fed by Transporter.

LOL!

Great cat fight!

I bet BJH made that mistake based on a certain someone's inability to post a quote correctly. Hint: check your post.

Here ya go...to paraphrase...

Tomjtx, it is obvious from reading your attempt at posting a quote that you are intellectually limited so it is understandable you made such a mistake.
I suggest you take an internet forum quote posting comprehension class at your local college . That might prevent you from embarasing yourself further.

(Spelling left per the original - no spell-flaming included in this parody.)

* Disclaimer: I am totally goofing off. No flame content is intended.

Dang, bjh posted whilst I was typing!

Hey, credit to bjh for not pointing out the need to capitalize proper nouns and spell check one's criticisms.

Quote:
Dang, bjh posted whilst I was typing!

Hey, credit to bjh for not pointing out the need to capitalize proper nouns and spell check one's criticisms.

I really should have been on guard for incompetence, he is a DUP fan after all! Perhaps his consistently spelling his "the"s correctly threw me off!

critisize teh spellung all you want, bjh.

Dat's OK wit me.

Your comprehension level still leaves something to be desired.

I am neither a DUP fan nor critic.

But, of course, if you were capable of rational thought you would have figured that out.

Thank you for the advice, Buddha.

I hope to someday attain your level of enlightenment :-)

Quote:
Thank you for the advice, Buddha.

I hope to someday attain your level of enlightenment :-)

Hi, amigo.

I think you are already well ahead of me!

Cheers!

I might be ahead in terms of decomposition :-)

Wasn't it Buddha who said to the hotdog vendor:

"Make me one with everything"

Happy thanksgiving, I plan to eat everything accompanied by a good red.

Now, that's enlightenment.

The 4 states of DUPness are as follows my child. Do not enter TEH path lightly for it is one that few have survived!

1) Teh step of mildly amusing commentary and teh beginning of poor spelling.

2) Teh step of Repetitive and Circular il-logic that will take you far off teh topic.

3)Teh step on which one goes off teh deep end and becomes truly and deeply annoying.

4) Teh final step, in which all new steps will be taken in odd colored socks and high-water sweat pants, in which one is compelled to scour teh Forum for mentionings of expensive cables, or heretical beliefs one doesn't really understand, in a futile but self-satisfying quest for final DUP_lightenment!

For all that take this path I implore you to instead find a cave and meditate on just how much better is communication when one can spell and listen to what is being said...

Quote:
Wasn't it Buddha who said to the hotdog vendor:

"Make me one with everything"

Still one of my favorite jokes.

This one still tickles. Apparently true silliness appeals to me.

Quote:
However, it makes sense that at the highest levels of recording and production that skilled, experienced trained listeners conduct every kind of test they can to eek out that last bit of perfection.

This may be the case for applying DBT when appropriate.

For reviewers of equipment and for most others, it could be difficult to do a DBT correctly. I've tried and am not convinced that I have controlled the variables enough to publish the results anywhere.

There are instances in any issue of Stereophile where a listening claim of difference is made but is not substantiated with anything else. Maybe the difference exists or maybe not. It does mean that a DBT done at that point could have settled the issue due to possible sighted-test bias. Because DBT was not done, we are left with the opinions and impressions of the reviewer. (Not to pick on reviewers, but I pick on anyone that makes such claims, including me).