Cable

[Czarcasm]

You're back with that heavy gauge stuff. And with top-end equipment, if there's a difference to be heard, I probably could hear a difference if there were one. Being a bit deaf means I need to be discriminating, to listen deeper, and to design the room as much as the system. And, therefore, I've designed some awesome theaters that made billionaires very happy.

Again with the claim that being partially deaf somehow makes you a better listener, which I've just got to call b.s. on. Being able to hear better would make you a better listener.

FTR: We sold them mid-tier cables. Good copper and well-attached connectors, with the latter being more important. Anything more expensive was a waste and you don't become a billionaire by throwing away money.

Could you, or someone you think can do it, tell the difference between the previously mentioned lampcord and the stuff you sold in a listening test?

And I still don't see the woo, if it exists, as anything that couldn't be learned, making it not-woo.

The woo is in the claim that people can tell the difference in quality when, logically, any such difference shouldn't be able to be heard by the human ear.

 

[jj]

Again with the claim that being partially deaf somehow makes you a better listener, which I've just got to call b.s. on.

It makes one a different listener for sure, and is likely to have the effect that sensation that others would never notice may be obvious. So, while "better" might not be correct, it is entirely possible that someone with impaired hearing might hear an effect inside of their sensation range than a person with no impairment would not be able to distinquish.

In particular, a shift in level from below sensation level (threshold) to above is very noticible.

A small change in loudness due to a small change in intensity (for the normal hearing person) may be completely indistinguishable.

So, that is a place where the person with injured hearing would notice something that somebody with Stevens-Standard loudness perception would not.

Lest you wonder, this has tripped up codec designers a few times, myself included.

Being able to hear better would make you a better listener.Could you, or someone you think can do it, tell the difference between the previously mentioned lampcord and the stuff you sold in a listening test?The woo is in the claim that people can tell the difference in quality when, logically, any such difference shouldn't be able to be heard by the human ear.

Well, you want to level match a time-proximate DBT to under .1dB. That is a level change (in amplitude) of about 1.0115 or so.

This could arise due to cable resistance vs. even a "resistive" load of 8 ohms, without too much silliness of cable length. In other words, about .1 ohm difference in cable resistance could, barely, create an issue.

Bear in mind that such teensy intensity differences are not ever heard to be loudness, rather they are percieved as "quality" or "depth" or any number of non-loudness-related sensation.

 

[Reno]

Because of other much more important things in my life (yes, there are some!) I hardly ever think about the cablething again. I'm not really interested for now and maybe for a long time to do a test. I will of course post the result. My first test gives me the idea that hearing the difference blindfolded is a hard thing to do, but if that was because of the not optimal conditions or because of the difference being small (not existant?) or both I don't/can't know. I like to add that I'm the opposite of a believer. (no, not bailing out, just nog interested for the time being). Later.

First of all, a blind or double blind test does not mean you need to wear a blindfold.

Second of all, unless I am misunderstanding human physiology, you hear with your ears, not with your eyes.

Third of all, you're not procrastinating because you don't need a million dollars - you're procrastinating because you can't do what you think you can. You will never apply for any test of these abilities you claim to have. Never.

 

[dropzone]

Could you, or someone you think can do it, tell the difference between the previously mentioned lampcord and the stuff you sold in a listening test?

Probably not. If a customer is spending a million on a theater you sometimes just have to bite the bullet and sell him what he thinks he needs. So we sold them the mid-tier stuff with a fancy name that didn't really cost a lot. No point in ripping people off, even if they ask you to.

The woo is in the claim that people can tell the difference in quality when, logically, any such difference shouldn't be able to be heard by the human ear.

That's not woo, the way dowsing and ESP are. It's just a grift, like three-card monte. It's already been tested multiple times and came up wanting. There is no reason the JREF should dirty its hands with it.

 

[Gr8wight]

Probably not. If a customer is spending a million on a theater you sometimes just have to bite the bullet and sell him what he thinks he needs. So we sold them the mid-tier stuff with a fancy name that didn't really cost a lot. No point in ripping people off, even if they ask you to.That's not woo, the way dowsing and ESP are. It's just a grift, like three-card monte. It's already been tested multiple times and came up wanting. There is no reason the JREF should dirty its hands with it.

But the JREF "dirties its hands" with it, as I said before, because it involves the promotion of critical thinking skills to the general public. For example, the product to which the OP linked should loudly sound several critical thinking alarm bells. Its description is patently ridiculous, yet the product sells because many people out there do not know how to exercise the intellectual tools of skepticism necessary to protect themselves from these fraudsters. Yes, the JREF publicly touts the anti-paranormal aspect of their activities, but promotion of basic critical thinking skills to the general public is also a large part of their mission, and the high-end audio world is particularly rife with these kinds of scams.

How does this differ from, say, Homeopathy? Do you think the JREF should also ignore alternative "medicine" scams as well, because they are not 'paranormal'?

 

[dropzone]

Okay, you convinced me. The JREF has my permission to test cable beliefs.

 

[Gr8wight]

Okay, you convinced me. The JREF has my permission to test cable beliefs.

I'm glad you finally saw the light. Now all we have to do is cure you of those pesky audio industry biases you still subscribe to.

 

[dropzone]

I'm glad you finally saw the light. Now all we have to do is cure you of those pesky audio industry biases you still subscribe to.

Biases? I have no biases. It's just that what I believe is correct and what everybody else believes, unless they agree with me, is wrong.

Quite simple, actually.