In article , Laurence Payne
lpayne1NOSPAM@dslDOTpipexDOTcom wrote:
On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 18:34:37 GMT, Dave Farrance
wrote:

There was talk on another group about credulity and hugely expensive
cables. I was just wondering if *anybody* was prepared to say that they
believe the claims for a cable like this, for example:


"What Hi-Fi" December issue has a page reporting a testing session for
skeptics. See: www.laurencepayne.co.uk/cables.html

They report the session fairly accurately, if selectively.

Throughout the magazine they continue to rave over magic cables. But,
to give due credit, several times they add "but see p.121 for another
opinion". I wonder if this qualification will persist in future issues?


Interesting that it is presented as "another opinion". i.e. Not presented
on the basis that actual evidence either fails to support, or contradicts
much of what they print. Or that they have no idea how to run a comparison
that might give reliable results. :-)

If you want a stark example of what Russ Andrews says, have a look at his
new 'column' sigh in 'Hi Fi News' this month. Given that he sells these
things I must confess I find it puzzling that he is now has such a column
which appears as *editorial* matter, not advertising, in such a magazine.
My reaction is that there is a conflict of interest, here.

BTW Dave, if you want to see a wider range of the kinds of views and
reactions people have to 'cables', then try a search back on this
group and some of the others. IIRC It has been a few weeks since we had
a 'local' argument about this. :-)

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html