| Columns Retired Columns & Blogs |
September 27, 2011 - 6:34pm
#1
linkedin audiophile group cable discussion
| Loudspeakers Amplification Digital Sources | |
Analog Sources Accessories Featured | |
Music Columns Retired Columns | |
Show Reports | |
Features Latest News Community | |
Resources Subscriptions |
© 2024 StereophileAVTech Media Americas Inc., USA
All rights reserved
Although a month late. Odd that none of the proponents of "all cables sound different" haven't bothered. Hmmmmm must be because they have no evidence that they do other than their "golden ears". Like I've stated before, without proper DBT, saying cable A is better than Cable B is just pissing in the wind. If you don't think DBT is relevant then you have no real scientific proof that cables sound different. Just "hearing a difference" can be attributed to sight bias, amount of money spent on new cable plus the Comb filter effect of head position in the room. Now if the cable has measurable LCR differences that is altering the frequency response of the signal then that is another matter and shame on them for making a wire that doesn't transfer a signal unaltered.Anyone that can show otherwise, please prove me wrong.
What would be the point of Doug Sax or anyone else being able to tell the difference between any two speaker cables that have less than 10% of the speakers impedance (Which speakers? The ones I have at my home?) and are less than 3 meters long? What would that prove and how would that "experimental data" affect the way I or anyone else shop for any kind of stereo component or affect the way we listen to our music systems? To make this model even remotely meaning ful, I would have to invite Doug Sax over to my house, have him bring some wire or any component that my local stereo shop also carries, and he can explain to me what he hears or doesn't hear while that particular component is used in my stereo system. The bottom line is if I like what I hear and it's reasonably priced, then I might buy it. Or not. If Doug hears a difference between Component A and Component B, but I can't because of a age-related hearing deficit, what does it matter? What if I hear a difference, but Doug doesn't?
There's actually no way to design a valid study that uses Double Blind Testing that can give you a result stating "Item A is better than Item B". Whether you use one test participant or thousands, whether you compare Radio Shack speaker cable to Nordost Valhalla's, or you once again compare Pepsi to Coke (Classic), a study using DBT can only state that a difference can be "detected" amongst two or more items, or not. Not whether one is "better" than the other.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_experiment
Look it up, google it, or better yet, check out the scientific journals that publish studies on the "perception" of hearing/listening and you will find not one study where the researchers interpret a statistically significant result to mean "Item A is better than Item B".
Same old tired excuses for not bothering? Listen, (pun intended) if you use a DBT to just see if there is a statistical difference in two cables and it shows there isn't, then isn't that proof enough that you couldn't tell which was which? Use some logic here. Also while doing the same test if you also wrote down which of the two cables you prefered each time , then it's a valid test to see if what you picked matches reality. Simple. No need to go all blah blah blah oh look at the dictionary term for a DBT blah blah blah. It's called using your brain to test accordingly.
So you think that by not being able to tell which cable is which during a DBT doesn't show that what you thought you heard doesn't hold up to reality? You can post link after link about "perception" of hearing/listening and you will find not one study where the researchers interpret a statistically significant result to mean "Item A is better than Item B". but then they don't CARE about which is "better" just if you can tell WHICh is WHICH and isn't that the same thing? Come on........if you can't tell which cable you are listening to in a DBT statisticly then how can you show that you prefer cable B over cable A? Use some common sense.
So JohnnyR,
Using your common sense, please tell me exactly how you would run a Double Blind Test to determine that Radio Shack speaker cables are better than Nordost Valhalla speaker cables when a person is listening to a stereo system that uses Radio Shack speaker cable compared to that same stereo system using Nordost Valhalla speaker cables.
JohnnyR,
What you're describing here under your Ho Hum post is not Double Blind Testing if the test participant knows which item is being tested. "Double blind" means both the test participant and the tester don't know which item is being tested.
Please read about Double Blind Testing and testing methodology.
"So you think that by not being able to tell which cable is which during a DBT doesn't show that what you thought you heard doesn't hold up to reality?"
The above is what I said to you in my last post and is this causing the confusion?
Your reading comprehension is poor. The above sentence MEANS that if you take a DBT where you can't see which cable is which and the results show a random result and you still think that one cable sounds better than the other during a visual test, then the DBT isn't valid? Perhaps I should have stated it like I did just now. So lets go a step further and instead of just asking you to mark down if you hear a difference betwen cable A and B, we just ask you to write down which sounds better during the DBT, Would that be more satisfying to you? It's really the same thing as in asking which is which. Lets face it, if you could tell which is which in a DBT then you certantly would have no problem telling us which sounds better too.
If in a properly designed DBT you end up with a random result, that means people weren't able to tell the difference between Item A and Item B. If you're comparing two stereo components, your DBT results would indicate that they sound the same.
Then when you ask people which they prefer or for their opinion about Items A, B, C, etc., that kind of information is subjective, like any opinion poll and outside of what Double Blind Testing is used for. Single Blind Testing is good enough in that case.
Double Blind Testing is a very rigorous testing method used in scientific and medical research that doesn't allow for personal preference, opinion, or any other subjective information. If you do a study using DBT, but your research methodology and number crunching is not precise and air-tight, then critics and other members of the scientific and medical community will jump on your work and rip it to shreds. Your results are then worth crap.
DBT is not appropriate for audio reviews, they're cumbersome to set up and apply, take a lot of time to administer, can cost a lot of money, and the results won't tell you what you want to know. Single Blind Testing, on the other hand, is way easier to apply, can cost next to nothing as long as you can borrow your test items, can be fun, and you might get some really useful, and surprising results. SBT can totally be applied to audio reviews and is appropriate to ask of any consumer-based magazine and audio reviewer.
Do your research, man! Read about the difference between DBT and SBT!
You are using semantics instead of logic. So you say that by marking down which cable you thought sounded better during a DBT isn't a valid test? All you would be doing is comparing cable A to cable B substituting "preference" with "which is which" If you claim to be able to tell "which is which" then wouldn't marking down "preference" be the exact result? Surely then after the test you can go back and revel which cables you"prefered and mark accordingly like you did for "which is which" The math didn't change nor did the results. Yes a properly done SBT would suffice but only if the listener is isolated both from seeing and hearing the person and equipment being switch out so no aural or visual clues are given to the listener. I just don't see your point of arguing against doing DBT like it's some horribly impossible thing for audio when it's done in other fields of science everyday.
I do know the differnce between DBT and SBT so you can stop with the links and lecturing already.So do you know of ANY audio reviewers that use a SBT at all? Name them please and examples. I just see you arguing against doing any sort of blind test in my opinion since "what you hear" seems to be good enough for you. Hurray
JohnnyR,
There's no excuse for not using the right tools when you want to do things properly, like knowing what you need when you change spark plugs in a '95 Oldsmobile Cutlass, or baking a sponge cake, or doing a study on the perception of optical illusions. My undergraduate degree in university (many decades ago) was in the psychology of learning (mainly in infants), neuropsychology, and statistical research methods. I've done this stuff before.
http://uhfmag.com/Issue90/Issue90.html
Look at their review of a couple of "cheap" interconnects... These people often do SBT when testing cables. In the history of audio reviewing, I've never seen a review or study published that successfully used DBT to evaluate any stereo component.
If you don't use your tools properly, your Oldsmobile dies at the end of your driveway, the cake goes flat and tastes awful, and the scientific and medical community laughs at you and don't take anything you have to say seriously.
in a different thread here remember? I guess not since you just felt free to repost that link again.
Here was my reply to that link: and it's a very poorly done test. Sounds like (pun intended) they just switched out the cables without even trying to randomize the sequeunce, hence every listener knew in advance that the next cable was going to be different.In fact it reads like they just did one test of each cable, first one, then the second and that was it. It's called expectaton bias. If you know for a fact that the next listen is with a different cable then of course you are straining to hear a difference and that in itself biased the results. Did they actually hear a difference? Maybe, but they didn't even bother to make any frequency, phase or level tests at all using readily available equipment. It's just more "I know what I heard" say so. I really got a laugh out of the listeners comments, " I noticed an acceleration in the ryhthem" Really? The cable made the tempo change?Wow.must be some magic cable......"There's more lower bass, and upper bass too" Did they measure the increase in bass to verify? of course not.........They kept refering to sounds being louder, wouldn't a simple test reveal if the cable was altering the line level? Yep but that wasn't an their agenda I suppose. If this is an example of doing a SBT then they should just forget doing any testing next time and just write the first thing that pops into their heads. Hmmmmm maybe that is what they did after all come to think of it."
So yes I do know that using your tools properly is important, it's a shame that they didn't and frankly I am having a good laugh at both them and you for even bringing their half assed attempts to light again. Thank you for participating in this thread but I see no reason to discuss with you anything else about DBt, SBT or simply doing honest real world tests like frequency, phase or level matching after reading once more than crappy so called SBT. *Chuckle*
So long, Don Johnny Quixote!
Hifitommy,
Is there anything you would like to add to this discussion, since you started this thread? Please feel free to jump in!
Johnny,
Can you find anything, any study, any test that's sited in this Hydrogenaudio Forum where the people doing the test were able to say "Item A is better than Item B" and they give specific reasons why one product was better than the other?
to keep on and on about "better" and I'm not going to entertain you post after post so you can just argue on and on. My statement about cables is this.....a cables sole pupose is to transfer the signal from point A to point B UNALTERED in any shape or form. If it does so, then it is a poorly designed cable. PERIOD. You have the link to Hydrogenaudio, why not start a thread there and ask them? I'm sure they can educate you. Have fun.*Evil grin*
Too bad you didn't read anything from that link.... You might have learned something. People also used to think that the Earth was the Centre of the Universe. I guess some people still do.
This is how YOU read. A shame you never see what's really on the links and pages. I guess picking and choosing what you want to see and hear is fun for you.
Hi Johnny,
You've been advocating the use of blind testing as a tool for others to review, test, or just listen to audio products. I asked you some specific questions, 1) How would you set up a DBT to establish that Item A is better than Item B? and 2) Point out a specific study or published test that successfully shows that Item A is better than Item B..., to see if you know what you're talking about. I've read most of the articles on that HydrogenAudio forum link (I don't read French or Spanish so didn't read those articles) and none of them answer question #2. From your vague and comical answers, all I can conclude is that you don't.
You don't really care about doing one so why waste my time on you? There you go again with the "better" phrase. Listen peabrain, a DBT and SBT tests if you can tell a difference between two items. If you can't, then both sound the same. Get it? Now if they both sound the same how can one sound "better"? God you are such an irritating person that just doesn't get it. Stop with the "better". Please describe to me how one can sound better than the other if you can't tell them apart in a DBT or SBT. You CAN'T. Hence my endless examples of your reading comprehension ability which is ZERO. I give up......go play in the street please. You're hopeless. Seriously.
Would anyone ELSE like to explain to Chris here what I've been saying over and over in a simple way that even he can understand it? If so then please do so. I doubt it will soak into his thick skull though.
I have been an audiophile for 50 years. I have listened to hundreds of pieces of equipment in hundreds of systems.
I believe the following to be absolutely and audibly true, based on extensive listening and experimentation:
1) Saying that (unbalanced) interconnect cable A is better than cable B is ALWAYS an incorrect statement (because it very much depends on what equpment it is connected to/ between).
2) The (unbalanced) connection between component A and component B MAY (or may not) be very much audibly affected by changing cables; I have certainly heard it to be so many many times.
3) The connection between component C and component D may be much less, or much more, sensitive to changes in cables; again, I have heard it to be so repeatedly.
4) the reason for this is that every component has an output circuit whose complex impedance variables interact with the impedances in the cable, which in turn interacts with the input impedances of the component at the other end.
The network thus formed between the component sending the signal and the cable and the component receiving the signal is not easy to analyze, due to the complexity of the 3-part network thus formed (RLC>RLC>RLC), and the near-impossibility of determining specific values for each part of the network under dynamic conditions.
It is therefore hard to predict which combinations of equipment will be more affected sonically by changes in connecting cables (even with sophisticated engineering network analysis programs). I am an electrical engineer and have carried out many scientific experiments to explore this issue.
Critical listening is still, ultimately, the best test. That is my firm opinion. When one cable degrades the sound audibly between two specific components and another cable does so to a lesser degree, it does NOT take a "golden ear" to tell the difference; just plain old ordinary ears, properly used, will EASILY discern the difference..
As for the people who say that cables never can make a difference in sound quality...I can only say that my experiences prove conclusively and unquestionably TO ME that you are dead wrong, and I cannot imagine how you could listen to a lot of sound equipment and sound systems and not hear the differences that cables CAN make and DO make when certain combinations of equipment are in use.
You can wax philosophical and spout bull about double-blind testing until you are blue in the face, and you will not convince me that audible differences do not exist, because I know when they are definitely audible to me, and when they are not, and that is an end on it.
NOTE-All of the above applies ONLY to unbalanced interconnect cables, which are extremely flawed from an engineering standpoint and DO degrade the signals fed through them to varying degrees; sometimes a lot...sometimes not much. Balanced cables are essentially flawless and never degrade the signal as long as they use properly designed XLR connectors and the standard cable type; the issues described above simply do not pertain to them. The reason that this is so is obvious to any engineer or well-educated technician and I am not going to go into it here.
The whole DBT thing is nothing more than a strawman argument erected by naysayers and anti-tweak neophobes who are way way behind the power curve. If the tester can't hear, DBTs ain't going to help much; if the test system is some generic bog standard POS DBTs won't help, either. Therefore, unfortuntely for the naysyaers, negative results of DBTs mean nothing and can be thrown out.
Geoff Kait
machina dynamica
Hey Johnny,
The results of a DBT study of any stereo component will only have relevance for the person who participates as a test listener in that study. Once that participant leaves the test situation, unless the tested component is plugged into the exact same test system and listened to in the exact same environment by the test participant under the exact same testing conditions, there's no way of knowing how the tested component will sound anywhere else.
Not matter how well a study using DBT is designed, it's extremely difficult to account for the infinite variation of how each person hears and how our individual brains interpret the sounds we hear. If that doesn't make sense to you Johnny, the next time you go to a live concert or you find yourself listening to someone's stereo system or even listening to a radio broadcast (Does anyone do that any more?), ask two or more people around you to tell you exactly what they "think" about what they are hearing. They can close their eyes if you want them to exclude visual bias....
I didn't write the rules on how DBT is used in medical and scientific research- that's already been well established before you or I ever existed. What you propose to do with DBT in audio reviews is scientifically inadequate and totally impractical.
I suppose comb filtering , sight bias and the amount of money spent didn't have anything to do with why cables sound different. Trying to place the blame on input and output impedance is laughable. Any component should have low output impedance, 100 ohms or less, and and input impedance of at least 10k to 100k. If not then buy some that do. Did anyone do any MEASUREMENTS to see if the cables had varying responses or did you all just rely upon your calibrated ears? Just saying "I know what I heard" doesn't cut it. Sorry.
Mr Kait, when you offer up one of your "products" to Stereophile for real testing THEN you can open your mouth and have an opinion about DBT, till then just shut it.
Chris, I give up on you ever learning to read about DBT in audio testing. Those links HAD ABX double blind tests in them but of course you can't see that for some reason. Over at HydrogenAudio they have used ABX to test MP3 codecs for YEARS. Please explain to me in your own words why testing a codec and testing cables would be different. They have ABX switching boxes to do so you know. Your example in your first paragraph is just so wrong but then again you would never be able to see that with your selective blindness. You think cables work differently depending on what preamps and amps are connected. Wow just wow. Okay fine, believe whatever you want, I give up on you learning anything about how real physics and science works. The purpose of a DBT is to eliminate sighted bias and to see if you can pick which is which. If you can't , then you also won't be able to do so even if you used 10 different amps or preamps in a DBT.
I'm done with this circle jerk so carry on with your opinions. Spend $2000 on your next cable. It's your money. Thank God.
Must be tough being the Man of La Mancha, Johnny. Must be lonely being confined by your own beliefs and even lonelier when you can't trust anyone or anything around you, even yourself...
Well....
So long, farewell
Auf Weidersehen, goodbye
I leave and heave
A sigh and say goodbye
Goodbye
I'm glad to go
I cannot tell a lie
I flit, I float
I fleetly flee, I fly
The sun has gone
To bed and so must I
So long, farewell
Auf Weidersehen, goodbye
*Do some homework and learn a little college-level statistics, Johnny, and you might understand why no one refers to the work at HydrogenAudio as being "definitive".
You speak of "output impedance ' as if it were solely resistive in nature; it is not! If anything may be considered laughable here, it would be your breathtaking lack of understanding of the complexity of the network behavior we are talking about. The technical nature of the subject is apparently far beyond your current educational level; your comments make that clear. You remind me of some student in one of my beginning electrical engineering classes who suddenly feels competent to tell one of his peers all about some subject he knows next to nothing about.
The capacitance and inductance of the circuitry are very significant parts of the output or input impedance of a circuit (and also of a cable), as any competent engineer witll tell you; ever heard of those? Circuit designers spend great effort and time considering and trying to deal with these issues which you trivialize as unimportant. They should apparently listen to you, and realize that they are just wasting their time...lol. Poor silly circuit designers...a genius in their midst with a revelation for them and they don't know it.
Your blithe dismissal of this problem displays a complete lack of understanding of the actual issues. A few years in some electrical engineering classes and some circuit design experience would be a good place for you to start; then you might be able to BEGIN to discuss the subject with a minmal competence. That would at least be a good START (I was at that level 30 years ago; you don't seem to be there yet!).
I guess one should not try to discuss basic hygeine with a hippopotamus; it can cause him to become excited and emit hot air.
Chris,
Like what you said made any sense in the real world. Honestly like I said over and over, your reading comprehension is ZERO so first learn to see the facts in front of you. HAHAHAHA yeah right you" know" all about ABX and DBT and SBT yet show only ONE audio link where tney butchered the "SBT" then you ignore all the links from HydrogenAudio as being non definitive. A lot of the links had nothing to do with HydrogenAudio but were done by people from all over the world.Jeeeez you are hopeless. HAHAHA
Commsy,
Okay smart guy show us some real world measurements confirming your side of the arguement. You won't.
So you are saying the output impedance of a preamp and the input impedance of an amp isn't resistive in the 20Hz to 20KHz audio band? Show your work. Come on lets see some examples. I bet all you can show is the low end and high end rolloff phase of a second order filter. Big deal, show me where that makes a cable change the frequency response. I'll be waiting. Show us all some REAL measurements where a straight piece of wire resistive in nature is going to change the signal. Come on lets go. What are you waiting for? The only examples I have ever seen where a cable of high enough impedance will affect the frequency respose is for a crapily designed tube amp where the output impedance is high. Then a reactive speaker will cause the fequency response to vary. That's a design flaw by the tube amp maker and shame on them.
If it's so damn important in cable design then why isn't it ever tested in reviews?
Your the one full of hot air. All blow and no show.
Johnny, Johnny,
You laugh a maniacal laugh... Your world must be populated by others just like you, who only see with 20/20 vision, who hear 20 to 20khz clearly and perfectly without a drop, who never get old, get sick, or die. Your understanding of science and mathematics clearly defines your world for you. You laugh a lot at people who don't belong in your world, but it must be a small and scary little place.
Aren't you even a little bit curious why no one else comes forward to defend your position?
Well Johnny,
Can't say I learned much hanging out with you at the Forums... There's not much to read while cllcking on dead links, ignoring the French and Spanish links, and wading through reports on HydrogenAudio that include lines like
"I couldn't tell a $300 amp from a $3000 in the store I was working at. Neither could anyone else who worked there. It was a major blow to my audio belief system"...
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/solid-state/12752-blind-listening-tests-amplifiers.html
or reading really old, ambiguous articles like
"Amplifiers Do Sound Different", by Martin Colloms, Hi-Fi News and Record Review, May 1986.
Debunked, then reconfirmed success.
http://www.bostonaudiosociety.org/bas_spea...ul_thinking.htm
or seeing what might possibly be significant or relevant with the un-scientific testing of old codecs for the average portable-audio (ie. iPod/iPhone/iPad, etc.) user today
http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=Lossless_comparison
Life's too short to be hanging out here! Since I can't cajole or bully you (for which I apologize for not being a good internet role model for our youngsters) into learning what's out there in a parallel universe right next door to yours, once again I say
"There's a sad sort of clanging from the clock in the hall
And the bells in the steeple too
And up in the nursery an absurd little bird
Is popping out to say "cuckoo"
Cuckoo, cuckoo
Regretfully they tell us Cuckoo, cuckoo
But firmly they compel us Cuckoo, cuckoo
To say goodbye . . .
Cuckoo!
. . . to you
So long, farewell, auf Wiedersehen, good night
I hate to go and leave this pretty sight
So long, farewell, auf Wiedersehen, adieu
Adieu, adieu, to yieu and yieu and yieu
So long, farewell, au revoir, auf wiedersehen
I'd like to stay and taste my first champagne
So long, farewell, auf Wiedersehen, goodbye
I leave and heave a sigh and say goodbye -- Goodbye!
I'm glad to go, I cannot tell a lie
I flit, I float, I fleetly flee, I fly
The sun has gone to bed and so must I
So long, farewell, auf Wiedersehen, goodbye
Goodbye, goodbye, goodbye
Goodbye!"(*)
Go enjoy life, Johnny, while you still have your 20/20 eyes and your 20-20khz ears. Enjoy the Sound of Music(*)! You never know, might not last long...
Oh wow look at you trying to use your "skills" to analyze me. Woooooooooooooooo! So impressive. Go back to your little world of "Im always right". At least I can comprehend what's on the written page unlike you.
No one bothers to speak to you simply because they have already gone through the same type of response on here over and over and can't be bothered wasting their time on you is my guess. What are your "skills" failing you? Can't see what's really out there? Here's one just for you HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
You showed me ONE link to a shoddily done SBT and got your panties in a wad over and over. Awwwwwwwwww you taking your ball and going home?
Yeah that poem describes you ........cuckoo!!!
Skeptics and naysayers have been getting their panties in a bunch ever since Polk and Monster Cable and Fulton introduced "controversial" cables 30 years ago. Placebo effect, expectation bias and double blind testing are the "intellectual" arguments of choice for the mossback skeptics and naysayers; one assumes they're intended to strike fear in the hearts of any yutz with ears. DBTs are for sissies who refuse to listen. Superior cables can sound quite inferior until they're broken in properly. That's precisely the reason that cable break-in devices have been around so long, not to mention cryogenics. Things are not so simple that A/B or DBT will get to the bottom of them. Why, it's almost as if the skeptics and naysyaers have been asleep for all this time.
Geoff Kait
Machina Dramatica
The test results I have accumulated on cable measurements in 30 years of scientific testing are in 5 large notebooks; over 600 pages of data.
It would cost me about $100 to have them copied and ship them to you, but I very much doubt that you could even begin to understand the information in them; you obviously do not have the educational background to comprehend the relevant technical information. Everything you say in the quote below is pseudoscientific half-truths to a competent electrical engineer; you are unfortunately trying to talk about things that you clearly do NOT understand fully.
You can only treat a cable as a simple RLC filter IF it is connected to a purely resistive source and load, which is NEVER the case in the real world of audio equipment. The source, in the real world, is a complex RLC network, and the load is similarly constituted. This is further complicated by the fact that you don't just have 3 RLC networks passively interacting (which is not at all simple mathematically). Part of the source and load RLC networks are not passive, but composed of the essential characteristics of non-linear devices (tubes, transistors, FETs) whose L and C change dynamically as they pass a signal.
If you have any sense at all, you will start to appreciate the tremendous complexity of this and the extreme difficulty of modeling such interactions on a computer or obtaining definitive results in a laboratory (even with the most sophisticated test equipment).
Let me know if you really want my papers, though, and we can arrange for payment and shipping. If you want to spend the money, I will accomodate you.
When you finish high school, Johnny, enroll in a good electrical engineering school and apply yourself. Then come back in 5 years or so and we will see if you are competent to begin to discuss this subject.
P. S. - Please don't come to UCLA; it would probably ruin a whole semester for me if you were to enroll in one of my classes.
This is "science"??
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=21&t=7953
AND you don't know the "Sound of Music"?? You're kidding, right? Your world is really that small....
Oh, oh, I get it now... You really are joking a la Sheldon Cooper ( snort!) Well, you really had me going there. I thought you really were SERIOUS about all this stuff! How clever.... Bazinga!
Shut it Mr Fraud, don't you have more crazy products to make up to fleece the public with? Your posts are so pathetic and based upon pseudo science. Grow up or should I say man up and confess that you sell complete crap.
HAHAHAHAHA like I said above you are all blow and no show. So you don't publish online but claim to have 30 years of papers blah blah blah. What a load of crap. Either show your work or shut it. You won't, can't and never will. Why would I pay you to see your make believe papers? Show us something of your's online if you dare......waiting............waiting.........Zzzzzzzzzzzzz. Awwwwwwww nothing so far. So now you are saying that what you obviously hear and measure can't be easily measured? Again HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Easy cop out . You show up, make claims you can't substantiate then say I don't know what I am talking about. Funny stuff. What do you teach at UCLA, "How to BS your way through 30 years"?
I thought you were leaving. I guess you don't keep your word much less know what it means to leave? What does knowing about the Sound of Music have to do with what you posted????????? You are a cuckoo, is what I replied with. Live with it.
So you don't like how one person did a blind test? Take it up with them on their forum. Okay now you may leave since you aren't talking to me anymore.
What I teach, Johnny, is electrical engineering. It's a rather well-paying job which requires a very high level of education and qualifications in order to be hired as a professor. It also requires one to do properly-structured research which is reviewed by highly-qualified respected peers within the profession in order to remain in the profession. Once my work has been reviewed by highly qualified people, it is rather unrealistic for you to think that your ill-conceived opinions of it are significant to me.
Since you are now resorting to repeated attempts to ridicule my educational achievements and my profession and my research...one can only observe how pathetic this is; it says a lot about you and nothing at all about me; quite a waste of your time.
Since you are now simply talking trash rather than discusing the subject at hand rationally, I see no point in responding to you further. It's quite clear that you are simply going to go on endlessly trying to insult and belittle people in this forum in order to avoid discussing the subject at hand in any meaningful way.
You seem to be interested in only two things; your own opinion and crude attempts to insult people; not much of a basis for an intelligent discussion, which is supposed to be the reason for this forum.
I have said all I have to say, and you have made no meaningful reponse. There is, therefore, no point in me or anyone else responding to you further...and I will not.
You don't watch television either?? Hmmmm! Fascinating, and quite admirable! Your posts provide a wealth of excellent material, Sheldon. (Your secret is absolutely safe here....) Quite interesting to see how your brain and thought processes work from the way you respond to everyone on this forum. You may never get rid of me because that's what keeps me coming back again and again.... You're way more interesting than wires and electronics!
Although you've never actually demonstrated the ability here on this forum, I'm sure you can use ""Google" to look things up. I'll give you some words that are near the beginning of the alphabet to make it easy. Look up the following words and let me know what you think...
1) Asperger Syndrome
2) anhedonia
3) agoraphobia
Yeah I'd run away too if I came on here, made big claims I couldn't back up and get all bitchy when called out on them then say ,
"You seem to be interested in only two things; your own opinion and crude attempts to insult people; not much of a basis for an intelligent discussion, which is supposed to be the reason for this forum.
I have said all I have to say, and you have made no meaningful reponse. There is, therefore, no point in me or anyone else responding to you further...and I will not."
Pot calling the kettle black? Your own responses haven't been exactly pristine white. Typical response from a blow hard that doesn't like proving anything. Go along then, you won't be missed.
Cuckoo! Now run along and play in the street since you have nothing meaningful to add to the original subject. Is this how you conduct yourself in your profession? Wow scary.
I am not running away, Johnny. I AM going to completely ignore anything YOU post in the future. There is a big difference. Hopefully others will follow my example and you will effectively cease to exist here.
I will gladly respond to anyone who has anything intelligent to say on this subject and can refrain from profanity, insults, and invective; you have repeatedly proven that you do not meet that standard.
We college professors soon learn the following; one can try to educate the willing, but when someone acts as if they are brain-dead, you just have to pull the plug and move on.
You are the subject now- you are way more interesting than wires and electronics, Johnny! Content and meaning is not what's important with you, but how you engage and interact with others. Just imagine Personality and Profile apps designed around the information we get from your posts! Just think about how someone can record a snippet of conversation or look at a post on an email (or posts on forums like this one!) to have patterns of word usage analyzed to figure out who you are and what you are about... Of course, law enforcement and national security agencies do this all the time, but an app that can be downloaded to any hand-held device or home computer by anyone in the general public could be very useful.
Would you like participate in a "study" using "Real Science" with the proper use of DBT, Johnny? We can even use some wires and electronics!
This IS the street, Johnny. So many people interacting on the internet on social media.
Awwwwwwwwww did the lil bitty "college professor" get his feelings hurt? GOOD! You need some reality. Keep on thinking you are better than eveyone else, it will get you a lot in life. Sooooooooooooo you can't backup your claims??? Thought so. Why would anyone else even bother listening to you? You come on here boasting in every post about your background and blah blah blah then can't back up your claims. Wonderful. Good luck in your so called profession.
Ermmmmmmmm okay you seem to be off your meds and babbling again. Business slow for you? People finding out that you're really a quack? Just asking. You showed everyone on here that you don't honor your word and keep talking to me post after post and the content is getting scary crazy. Content and meaning would be a difficult subject for you since you failed to prove your point over and over.
Sorry but I can't be bothered responding to your craziness anymore. Go find a rock to talk to, you just might be able to win an arguement with it.........maybe.
Carry on, Johnny, you are the business!
Commsysman, while I can certainly appreciate your experience with cables and technical knowledge, there's a few nits I wish to pick with your assertion that balanced cables are essentially perfect, to paraphrase your words. The problem with cables in general, icluding balanced cables, is they are not "perfect." Here are some things that can be done to improve the performance of ANY cables, including balanced cables:
1. Break in cables using break-in device. A minimum of a week or two is usually required.
2. Demagnetize the cables.
3. Remove static charge from cables using antistatic spray or de-ionizer.
4. Elevate the cables off the floor to minimize vibration and static electric field effects.
5. Use cables with white jackets instead of cables with black jackets, all things being equal.
"No matter how far you think you have come you would have come even further if you had had more to begin with." - old audiophile axiom
Geoff Kait
machinadynamica.com
I regard everything you have said as completely incorrect and without any merit whatsoever.
40 years of listening experience as an audiophile, plus hundreds of hours of scientific experimentation in an engineering lab, firmly convince me that none of the things you describe have any effect whatsoever.
I have heards hundreds of audilble differences in equipment performance and unbalanced cable performance, but I have never been able to hear any audible variation of any kind when balanced connections are in use; the sound quality never varies due to any changes or variations in the unbalanced cables used, and the sound quality associated with them does not change due to "break-in", color, elevation, or barometric pressure.
My home has a $30,000 all-balanced audio system that produces incredibly lifelike sound. After 30 years spent refining and tweaking it, I think I am quite sensitive and perceptive to what produces an audible difference and what does not.
I also must point out that the best recording studios and recording venues all over the world use balanced connections for microphone and interconnect cables up to 100 feet long, and that these cables are not benefitted by any of the things you suggest; they are very often site-fabricated generic cables using standard inexpensive generic AES/EBU cable stock and very ordinary XLR connectors. The result is excellent recorded quality unless extraneous factors dictate otherwise... such as a crappy performance or bad sound engineering.
Pages