Bi-wiring vs bi-amping
 

Don Pearce wrote:

[AVR-300 v AVR-250]
You would not get an answer to such a question, because there isn't
one. Pick the one you prefer, from any of the many dozens of
parameters that might inform your preference.

Which is why I asked the opinion of people on here. Basically, was it
worth spending an extra £400 to get slightly more power, a set of
pre-outs to enable bi-amping, and lights above the input selector buttons.

In the end I decided it wasn't worth spending an extra £400 just to get
these features, but... some opinions would have been nice. But obviously
people were still so busy arguing about whether or not cables sound
different that they had no time to reply to a serious question.

As for the cables, you know by now what that is all about.

Yes, I think I've figured that out. There are some people who can hear
the difference, and some who can't. Those who can't accuse those who can
of being "liars", "arrogant", or various other Pinkerton-esque insults.
Those who can sit back and smugly listen to their music sounding lovely,
imagining those who can't listening to the racket that ensues when you
insist on wiring up 4 grand's worth of kit with bell wire.

There's also another group, who have never done any tests, but refuse to
believe that something like changing the cables can actually make any
difference.

But it's not all snake oil. Once you've filtered the genuine stuff
from snake oil, you're left with some pretty good products. It's
the filtering that takes the effort.
This reminds me of the UFO situation. You debunk a hundred stories,
and the UFO spotters still say "well, there are a few left that must
still be true". No, all of them are false - they simply haven't all
ben specifically debunked yet.

Actually, once you've filtered out the hokum and the fanatics, what
you're left with is a bunch of people seeing top-secret classified
military aircraft being tested. Which have as much to do with "little
green men" as my right testicle. (No rude comments anyone, please...
pokes tongue out )

Whether they think they're seeing extra-terrestrials or not is another
matter, but a UFO is exactly that - an object that's flying yet
unidentified.

Now, let's turn the psychological argument back on itself. You
don't believe there's a difference between the way different cables
sound, so you won't hear one even if it's there.
Doesn't matter - as you've been told many times. You believe you can
hear a difference. If you can demonstrate to the rest of us that this
is reality, and not, as we all believe, self delusion, then we will
be believers too.

Ah, but, perhaps the fact you *can't* hear a difference is because you
believe there isn't one?

As I've said before, it's like Creationist fundamentalists who
would still refuse to accept evolution even if God himself appeared
before them and told them it was true. [1]
That's right - and here we are appearing before you telling you that
your creationist belief in cable sound is not true.

Except I'm a committed atheist...

The other difference - I've *heard* differences in cable sound. I've
never seen or heard any evidence to suggest there's any form of divine
being.

And you, my friend, certainly do not have deity-like status.

What does it take to make you go away?

Go do some tests yourself, using some decent high-end kit. Try swapping
speaker cables and interconnects over. If you can hear a difference, set
up a blind test. If you still hear a difference, do a double blind test.

If you can't hear a difference then I'll accept that *you* can't hear a
difference.

And once again, we're forgetting the real reason we're all into
hi-fi in the first place... BECAUSE OF THE MUSIC. It's far too easy
to get blinded by the technology... the music is the most important
thing, period.
Then please, just stop talking about technology. It annoys the rest
of us, and makes you look stupid. Just go and enjoy your music.

Technology is a good thing. But music is more important.

And if it also makes you happy, go and enjoy your cables.

Oh, I will, trust me. When I can hear a clear improvement by swapping
from, say, Gale XL-105 up to Audio Innovations Silver, then as big an
improvement again by swapping up to Chord Rumour 4, I'd say there's
something in it.

And of course you end up enjoying the music more. Which is what really
counts.

--
Glenn Richards Tel: (01453) 845735
Squirrel Solutions http://www.squirrelsolutions.co.uk/

IT consultancy, hardware and software support, broadband installation

Bi-wiring vs bi-amping
 

In article , Jo
wrote:
In , Glenn Richards
typed:

Now, let's turn the psychological argument back on itself. You don't
believe there's a difference between the way different cables sound,
so you won't hear one even if it's there.


There are specific procedures such that the psychological aspect can be
eliminated from comparative tests.

For example a double blind test would involve the subjects and testers
*not* knowing what cables were in use before/during the test. There
would also be some dummy cable samples included that definitely *did*
slightly alter the sound quality. The sound source and material would
have to be taken into account as would the number and range of
subjects. No doubt, more safeguards could be included.

Given sufficient runs of the above tests, any real effect could be
teased out. Has anyone actually done this ?

People have tried such tests for various 'audio' purposes. Alas, the
results may show [1] no sign of the participants being able to hear the
differences that they claim/believe in. The result is often that they
then decide that the "test must be flawed".

i.e. they discard the scientific method and prefer faith in their own
beliefs.

Extending this idea to the HiFi industry in general...is there any
recognised independent listener panel that gives opinions on relative
sound quality of equipment ? For example "Speaker A sounds better than
Speaker B according to a panel of 50 listeners in double blind tests as
described..." ? I've read the florid ramblings of individuals with axes
to grind...when describing the sound from some high-end piece of kit but
is there anything better in the industry ?

Depends what you mean but "the industry", Magazine reviews rarely do tests
that yeild results that can be assessed by others. Some makers/designers
may well do them, but do not report the results openly as they use them to
guide their development decisions.

So far as professional bodies like the IEEE and AES are concened, I
suspect that most members decided this was a wasto of time many
years ago, but that for the reason outlined above it would be
politic to simply leave the argument to others... ;-

Slainte,

Jim

[1] There are some specific exceptions. see

http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioM...kracables.html

for an outline of the situation.

--
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

Bi-wiring vs bi-amping
 

In article , Glenn
Richards wrote:
Don Pearce wrote:



As for the cables, you know by now what that is all about.

Yes, I think I've figured that out. There are some people who can hear
the difference, and some who can't.

Not quite. :-)

There are those who say/believe they can, and those who don't. :-)

But the problem is that those who say/believe they can then tend to refuse
to engage in a test whose protocol would enable us to obtain results which
would actually help us to decide if their 'faith' was well founded or
not...

Those who can't accuse those who can of being "liars", "arrogant", or
various other Pinkerton-esque insults.

Oddy enough, although I seem not to be able to hear the kinds of things
you keep claiming, I can't recall ever calling you any of the above.

Rather than focussing on the 'insults' perhaps you should, instead,
care about those who would take your claims seriously *if* you were
to engage in a test whose outcome might support your belief by providing
useful evidence. :-)

Failing that, for someone else who has similar beliefs to do so. Ideally
for a number of them to do so.

So far as I can see, the reason we don't seem to progress beyond 'insults'
and emotion-based arguments is that those who assert they can hear these
differences decline to participate in such tests. Thus preventing us from
moving the argument onto a more rational basis.

Have you now had more time to consider the points about the scientific
method and the requirements for experimental protocols to ensure that
the results would be useful as evidence? Could you perhaps now say
on that basis what the flaws/omissions were in the method you previously
reported?


Technology is a good thing. But music is more important.

The snag being that you may need the 'technology' to listen to the
'music'...


Indeed, musical instruments are also a 'technology'... ;-

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

Bi-wiring vs bi-amping
 

On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 10:03:49 +0100, Glenn Richards
wrote:

But it's not all snake oil. Once you've filtered the genuine stuff from
snake oil, you're left with some pretty good products. It's the
filtering that takes the effort.

Bull**** - there is no such thing as 'cable sound'.

Now, let's turn the psychological argument back on itself. You don't
believe there's a difference between the way different cables sound, so
you won't hear one even if it's there.

Bull**** - the point is that *you* can't hear it unless you *know*
what's connected.

Keep reading that "Scott's Guide". You might learn something.

I know as much as I need to know about audio at this point in time.

Typical arrogant nonsense from you. The reality is that you know
visrtually *nothing* about audio, as you prove over and over again.

That
doesn't mean I'm not willing to learn more, in fact I'm a firm believer
that there are some things you can never learn too much about. And if
time constraints allow, or work were to demand it, I'd be more than
happy to brush up on underlying technology.

If you actually *cared* about your supposed hobby, you'd have done
this years ago.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

Bi-wiring vs bi-amping
 

On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 12:59:19 +0100, Glenn Richards
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:

[AVR-300 v AVR-250]
You would not get an answer to such a question, because there isn't
one. Pick the one you prefer, from any of the many dozens of
parameters that might inform your preference.

Which is why I asked the opinion of people on here. Basically, was it
worth spending an extra £400 to get slightly more power, a set of
pre-outs to enable bi-amping, and lights above the input selector buttons.

In the end I decided it wasn't worth spending an extra £400 just to get
these features, but... some opinions would have been nice. But obviously
people were still so busy arguing about whether or not cables sound
different that they had no time to reply to a serious question.

As Don pointed out, it wasn't a serious question.

As for the cables, you know by now what that is all about.

Yes, I think I've figured that out. There are some people who can hear
the difference, and some who can't.

No, there are *no* people who can hear the difference.

Those who can't accuse those who can
of being "liars", "arrogant", or various other Pinkerton-esque insults.
Those who can sit back and smugly listen to their music sounding lovely,
imagining those who can't listening to the racket that ensues when you
insist on wiring up 4 grand's worth of kit with bell wire.

Your arrogance is matched only by your ignorance - and your cowardice.


Ah, but, perhaps the fact you *can't* hear a difference is because you
believe there isn't one?

It's not about *us*, it's about the patently obvious fact that *you*
are talking porkies - you can't really hear any differences.

Go do some tests yourself, using some decent high-end kit. Try swapping
speaker cables and interconnects over. If you can hear a difference, set
up a blind test. If you still hear a difference, do a double blind test.

If you can't hear a difference then I'll accept that *you* can't hear a
difference.

Interesting that *you* refuse to take this test you're recommending to
others, even though you would both prove your point and collect a
healthy wedge of cash. Basically, you're a liar.

Oh, I will, trust me. When I can hear a clear improvement by swapping
from, say, Gale XL-105 up to Audio Innovations Silver, then as big an
improvement again by swapping up to Chord Rumour 4, I'd say there's
something in it.

That's because you're a dickhead and a liar.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

Bi-wiring vs bi-amping
 

Jim Lesurf wrote:

But the problem is that those who say/believe they can then tend to
refuse to engage in a test whose protocol would enable us to obtain
results which would actually help us to decide if their 'faith' was
well founded or not...

Probably because the likes of Pinkerton persist on posting tirades of
abuse to anyone who says they can hear a difference. And aren't prepared
to lower themselves to his childish and juvenile level.

Oddy enough, although I seem not to be able to hear the kinds of
things you keep claiming, I can't recall ever calling you any of the
above.

You seem to be one of the fading minority that have the ability to
disagree with someone else's viewpoint and have it be just that, a
disagreement. I'd mistakenly credited Don Pearce with the same ability,
but recently he's proven himself to be little better than Pinkerton.
Which is sad, because he seems like an otherwise intelligent person.
(Don Pearce, I mean... Pinkerton comes across as a complete cretin.)

Then again, this is Usenet, and on Usenet there are always two points of
view. Yours, and the incorrect one. ;-)

--
Glenn Richards Tel: (01453) 845735
Squirrel Solutions http://www.squirrelsolutions.co.uk/

IT consultancy, hardware and software support, broadband installation

Bi-wiring vs bi-amping
 

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

It's not about *us*, it's about the patently obvious fact that *you*
are talking porkies - you can't really hear any differences.

You really are quite unbelievable. Tell me something. Were you picked on
as a small child? Always being beaten up, always getting laughed at in
the changing rooms?

Your level of disregard for the opinions of others is in itself beneath
contempt. You'll probably find that the reason nobody wants to take your
test is because nobody wants to lower themselves to your level.

And with your attitude I'm not a bit surprised.

--
Glenn Richards Tel: (01453) 845735
Squirrel Solutions http://www.squirrelsolutions.co.uk/

IT consultancy, hardware and software support, broadband installation

Bi-wiring vs bi-amping
 

On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 19:59:59 +0100, Glenn Richards
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

It's not about *us*, it's about the patently obvious fact that *you*
are talking porkies - you can't really hear any differences.

You really are quite unbelievable. Tell me something. Were you picked on
as a small child? Always being beaten up, always getting laughed at in
the changing rooms?

Nope. Are you thinking of someone a little closer to home? :-)

Your level of disregard for the opinions of others is in itself beneath
contempt.

I have no problem with the opinions of others. I do have a problem
with arrogant clowns who state their opinions as fact, and refuse to
test the veracity of those opinions.

You'll probably find that the reason nobody wants to take your
test is because nobody wants to lower themselves to your level.

And with your attitude I'm not a bit surprised.

Actually, it's not *my* test, I'm just putting money behind it. You
are simply afraid to take such a test because you already know that it
will shut your loud and lying mouth.

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

Bi-wiring vs bi-amping
 

On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 19:55:12 +0100, Glenn Richards
wrote:

Jim Lesurf wrote:

But the problem is that those who say/believe they can then tend to
refuse to engage in a test whose protocol would enable us to obtain
results which would actually help us to decide if their 'faith' was
well founded or not...

Probably because the likes of Pinkerton persist on posting tirades of
abuse to anyone who says they can hear a difference. And aren't prepared
to lower themselves to his childish and juvenile level.

The real truth is that you're just *afraid* to take any test which
will reveal you to be a fool and a liar.

Oddy enough, although I seem not to be able to hear the kinds of
things you keep claiming, I can't recall ever calling you any of the
above.

You seem to be one of the fading minority that have the ability to
disagree with someone else's viewpoint and have it be just that, a
disagreement. I'd mistakenly credited Don Pearce with the same ability,
but recently he's proven himself to be little better than Pinkerton.
Which is sad, because he seems like an otherwise intelligent person.
(Don Pearce, I mean... Pinkerton comes across as a complete cretin.)

Then again, this is Usenet, and on Usenet there are always two points of
view. Yours, and the incorrect one. ;-)

There is also the small matter of independently verifiable blind
listening tests, which will prove whether you actually do have the
ability you claim. Of course, you will continue to run a mile from
such tests.

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

Bi-wiring vs bi-amping
 

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

Your level of disregard for the opinions of others is in itself
beneath contempt.
I have no problem with the opinions of others. I do have a problem
with arrogant clowns who state their opinions as fact, and refuse to
test the veracity of those opinions.

You are of course confusing the stating of opinions as fact. For example:

Fact: Using the equipment I currently have, when I switch from Gale
XL-185 to Audio Innovations Silver Bi-Wire, I hear an improvement.

Fact: When I upgrade to an even better cable (Chord Company Rumour 4) I
hear another big improvement.

Opinion: Therefore, based on my observations above, a better cable will
improve the sound.

Or how about something a little closer to home...

Fact: Stewart Pinkerton is a highly abusive and unpleasant individual.

Opinion: Stewart Pinkerton is a complete tosser.

In both the above examples, the "fact" section is based on actual
observations. In the first example, I heard a difference between cables
- this is an unquestionable fact, regardless of the actual mechanism
behind hearing the difference. It doesn't matter if it was
"psychological", I still heard a difference. Therefore, based on these
observations, I formed the opinion that cables do affect the sound.

In the second example, I've witnessed you being unpleasant and highly
abusive to many participants on this group. Based on this, I formed the
opinion that you are a complete tosser.

So your knowledge of the English language is clearly about as poor as
your knowledge of IT or audio. You are proving yourself to be more of a
fool the more you continue.

--
Glenn Richards Tel: (01453) 845735
Squirrel Solutions http://www.squirrelsolutions.co.uk/

IT consultancy, hardware and software support, broadband installation