"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
Check carefully those 'no quibble money back guarantees' Many insist
the item must be fit for re-sale and have the original packaging.

I wouldn't expect anything less - would you?

How many people keep packaging for small low value items?



Anybody with half a brain buying them with a view to giving them a *trial*
and hoping/expecting to get their money back, I would have thought - no...??

In article . com,
David Lodge wrote:
And where's your proof of this? Electrical resistance is but measurable
electrical property. Ears know nothing about resistance, they can't
measure it, but they can detect many audible nuances that electric
equipment simply can't.

Nice thing to say, but have you any proof of this? But there's more to a
cable's properties than simple resistance. Inductance and capacitance, for
example.

--
*Nostalgia isn't what is used to be.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 27 Nov 2005 17:44:26 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
Even with a 'no-quibble money back guarantee'....? How 'fair' does it
have to get?

Check carefully those 'no quibble money back guarantees' Many insist the
item must be fit for re-sale and have the original packaging.



I wouldn't expect anything less - would you?


In the case of something I'm sending back because it doesn't work -
yes. It doesn't work, so they shouldn't be seeking to re-sell it.
Packaging is not germane in such cases.



Demonstrably *faulty* components are one thing, sending something back
because you are *disappointed* with it, or availing yourself of a 'trial
period' is another...

On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 12:20:47 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 27 Nov 2005 17:44:26 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
Even with a 'no-quibble money back guarantee'....? How 'fair' does it
have to get?

Check carefully those 'no quibble money back guarantees' Many insist the
item must be fit for re-sale and have the original packaging.



I wouldn't expect anything less - would you?


In the case of something I'm sending back because it doesn't work -
yes. It doesn't work, so they shouldn't be seeking to re-sell it.
Packaging is not germane in such cases.



Demonstrably *faulty* components are one thing, sending something back
because you are *disappointed* with it, or availing yourself of a 'trial
period' is another...


No. Doesn't work = doesn't work. It doesn't matter if it was because
the thing was faulty, or it never had a chance of working in the first
place because the whole thing was mis-conceived.

d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

In article . com, David
Lodge wrote:
The only property of a
domestic hi-fi loudspeaker cable that has anything to do with its
performance is its electrical resistance.

And where's your proof of this? Electrical resistance is but measurable
electrical property. Ears know nothing about resistance, they can't
measure it, but they can detect many audible nuances that electric
equipment simply can't.

Ears can hear the results of differences in the electrical properties of
equipment that is used to play sounds. If there are no such differences,
then you won't hear them, because you can't hear something that doesn't
exist.

If you really think there are differences in loudspeaker cables that can
produce audible differences despite no measureable electrical differences,
then you might like to be reminded of the £1000 challenge that someone in
this newsgroup made a few days ago to anyone who can demonstrate by means
of a properly witnessed scientifically conducted double blind test that
they really can hear something. I think the person was serious about the
offer. It certainly wouldn't do any harm to find out, and the experiment
might be interesting, and just think how much hi-fi gear you could buy
with that money if you turned out to be right....

Please let us know the results of the test. Unfounded categorical
statements do not convince me, or any other rational person.

Rod.

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 12:20:47 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 27 Nov 2005 17:44:26 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
Even with a 'no-quibble money back guarantee'....? How 'fair' does it
have to get?

Check carefully those 'no quibble money back guarantees' Many insist
the
item must be fit for re-sale and have the original packaging.



I wouldn't expect anything less - would you?


In the case of something I'm sending back because it doesn't work -
yes. It doesn't work, so they shouldn't be seeking to re-sell it.
Packaging is not germane in such cases.



Demonstrably *faulty* components are one thing, sending something back
because you are *disappointed* with it, or availing yourself of a 'trial
period' is another...


No. Doesn't work = doesn't work. It doesn't matter if it was because
the thing was faulty, or it never had a chance of working in the first
place because the whole thing was mis-conceived.



You can try and re-write the rules if you want, but if you accept the offer
of a 'trial period' which says return in good/resaleable condition with
original packaging you will be deemed to have accepted those conditions by
any court in the land. Perfectly reasonable in my book...

The 'return it simply because you don't like it' offer from many vendors is
a fairly recent and useful phenomenon that I wouldn't like to see disappear
just because a few idiots couldn't (or wouldn't) play ball...

So to boil all that down then, my suspicion that you have to reach a
certain minimum standard of cable in order to get the best out of
your system, but that beyond that you'll make no difference at all,
no matter how much you spend, would be right?

I would say that's 100% correct, yes.

I would say it's nonsense.

Now I'm totally confused Stewart, as I thought you agreed with this earlier?
Resistance needs to be below a value that will cause degradation, but after
that, it will make no difference how little resistance there is, or how
much/little oxygen the cable contains etc?

If it has nice thick copper
conductors it should be fine, regardless of what it looks like or what you
paid for it.

So is there or isn't there a minimum spec? How thick is "nice and thick"?

Mark

"Mark R Penn" wrote in message


That with less resistance and fewer losses in the cable,
more information must get through.

If ordinary cable is vastly more than sufficient to pass all
relevant information that is supplied, then where is the
advantage to a *better* cable?

If my supply of audio information is figuratively limited at
the source by a 3/4" garden hose, what benefit is there to
using a 12 foot diameter pipe to transfer it?

BTW, this metaphor is *not* hyperbole - the actual limiting
effect of an ordinary interconnect is even less than that of
a 12 foot diameter pipe as compared to a garden hose.

"Mark R Penn" wrote in message
...

Now I'm totally confused Stewart,............

Sorry Roderick - didn't mean to use your surname there. My bad.

Mark

On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 12:47:53 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:

Demonstrably *faulty* components are one thing, sending something back
because you are *disappointed* with it, or availing yourself of a 'trial
period' is another...


No. Doesn't work = doesn't work. It doesn't matter if it was because
the thing was faulty, or it never had a chance of working in the first
place because the whole thing was mis-conceived.



You can try and re-write the rules if you want, but if you accept the offer
of a 'trial period' which says return in good/resaleable condition with
original packaging you will be deemed to have accepted those conditions by
any court in the land. Perfectly reasonable in my book...

The 'return it simply because you don't like it' offer from many vendors is
a fairly recent and useful phenomenon that I wouldn't like to see disappear
just because a few idiots couldn't (or wouldn't) play ball...


This "return it simply because you don't like it" is just a red
herring here; it isn't what I'm talking about.

Take for instance the $200 mains cable from that company that sells
mains conditioners. They claim it will lower the noise floor of my Hi
Fi. OK, lets suppose I have no technical knowledge, and buy one on the
strength of that. What is the position when I discover that the noise
floor hasn't been reduced by even a microdB? What is the position when
I discover that this holds true for every Hi Fi on the planet (excuse
hyperbole)? Should I be denied a refund because I no longer have the
packaging and they can't immediately sell it to some other poor
sucker?

I don't think so.

d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com