On Tue, 31 May 2005 15:52:51 +0000 (UTC), Rob
wrote:
Don Pearce wrote:
On Tue, 31 May 2005 12:00:28 +0000 (UTC), Rob
wrote:
snip
I simply don't know. I'd like to be able to explain point (1), that's
all. If you throw out actual difference, what are you left with?
Explanations could be: physiological; psychological; sociological;
environmental; political; anthropological. Or pathological :-)
Take your pick. And garnish with evidence, if you would.
Rob
The evidence is right there in Stewart's as-yet unclaimed thousand
pound prize to anybody who can show that they can hear a difference
between cables. The evidence is there with rabid high-enders like Greg
Singh (who no longer posts) who was strident in his claims of night
and day differences which mysteriously vanished when he could not see
which cable was plugged in.
So - you agree that cables can make a difference to sound quality for
some people? On a more down to earth note i am surprised that none of
the more strident cableophiles haven't taken Stewart up on his offer. Is
it one-way, or a bet? Or does Stewart have a horde of cable people
locked away, never to return, much less appreciate fine cables?
Please read that again. Your conclusion is the exact opposite of what
the test revealed. The cable made no difference to him, the belief
that a cable could make a difference did make a difference.
It is there in a test which I myself proctored, in which similarly
vocal types were asked to comment on the sounds of various cables in a
sighted test. They all agreed that the cables sounded very different,
and they all agreed on a description of the types of sound they heard.
What they did not know until after the test was that the cables I was
changing were not the ones carrying the signal - which remained
unchanged throughout.
I'm afraid that this and a thousand other physical and psychological
studies say that the human brain is very, very easily fooled, and
evidence from a sighted test is totally valueless.
I agree. Let me go back to the beginning.
1. Some people can differentiate between cables;
Agreed - they sound different if they (we) can see them.
No, they DON'T sound different. When are you going to grasp this
fundamental point.
2. DBT doesn't reliably support that finding;
Agreed - they all sound the same.
3. DBT, for this purpose, is a flawed method?
I think we agree - DBT doesn't tell us anything about *why* this effect
arises.
People react mostly to the visual cue. Couple that with expectation,
and you can forget the sound - it simply doesn't figure in the
picture. If you want to examine the psychology of that, then fine, but
it is exactly why DBT is vital to establish whether there is a
difference.
As should be clear, I don't know that all cables have the same effect on
audio. I have four main points of focus:
1. Physical science: frankly, I don't have the capacity to prove
anything from that toolbox;
But plenty of people have, and it should not be too much of a leap of
faith for you to accept their findings. You must, of course, disregard
anything said by people with something to sell.
2. Controlled tests: magazines and DBTs. I don't really know what to
make of these. Overall i'm not convinced either way;
Beware of magazines. Advertising revenues are far too dependent on
good reviews.
3. Anecdote: interesting as it goes, but too many variables;
Just forget it. What the bloke down the pub said isn't evidence.
4. Personal experience. The only speaker cable I've bought was QED 79
biwire - it's in the loft right now (I don't like the look of it!). The
other cables I have found or was given. I can't tell any difference
between them, and all I do is make sure they make a good physical
contact and are out of harm's way. The only exception was I thought at
one point biwiring made a difference, then I wasn't sure, then I gave up.
But that's just me, and I'm half-deaf and amuse myself at how daft *I*
can be during critical listening. Some people are very serious about
this, and spend significant proportions of their disposable income on
wire. I think there's more to this than DBT is telling me.
On a personal level, you have this sorted.
If you want to see this in spades, look up the McGurk effect.
I think that's interesting, although I'd like to understand the point at
which auditory cues 'overstep' visual stimuli. Some of the 'best' cables
look very unpromising - I think DNM little skinny cables?
Rob
Forget this "best" stuff. The best speaker cable is one that is thick
enough not to lose you too much signal, and long enough to reach the
speaker.
d
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com