• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Question on high-end interconnects

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm on the fence with alot of this stuff. High priced cables, power cords, burn in etc. Then, there are the Machina Dynamica style tweeks that are totally beyond my comprehension. Where do we draw the line? One thing for sure it's a facinating subject.

cubdog
 
DougMac said:
Thanks for posting that interesting article. The question is, what to make of it? Did it, as the author claimed, hoist those who demand scientific tests on their own petard? Was the test so deeply flawed that it proved nothing? I encourage you to read the article and come to your own conclusions.

How did this test relate to me or to others here? I highly doubt I'll ever shell out $10,000 for one stereo IC and two 15 foot speaker cables. I'll never own a system where that expense for cables is in line with the rest of the system. If I had a system that might be considered low to mid audiophile, say total system outlay in the $5k to $10k range, I think I'd be far more likely to hear an improvement by taking that $10k and applying it to a speaker and/or amp upgrade.

Can I take those results and interpolate them to less expensive cables, something in the range of the "cheap" QED's they threw into the test? Could I assume, say that the QED's would stand head and shoulders above Monoprice cables or that I could hear differences in the QED's and other cables similarly priced? Personally, I wouldn't use that test to make any assumptions.

I did find a couple of things interesting. One judge scored the "cheap" QED cables first in one test and last in the other. There are two possible explanations. The first is the cables had "synergy" with one system and not the other. The second is that it shows randomness in the response of the judges and that two tests aren't enough. It also shows that there might have been some environmental factors, such as the lunch and the pint or two of bitter they consumed between tests. For me a far more conclusive but impractical test would be to have the same three repeat the test on the same equipment using the same songs over an extended period. If they scored the cables in the same order 45 out of 50 trials, then we could say with some assurance that there is an audible difference between them.
Click to expand...

The thing that I found most disturbing about the test was having drapes placed in front of the equipment. I tend to think that doing so adversely affected the acoustics of the room. As JohnVF said, though, I applaud their willingness to make the effort anyway. It is not the way I would make a decision about what cables to buy, but at least it gives us something to discuss.
 
its not some peer reviewed study. Aren't you at least glad they made some effort?
Click to expand...

Actuall it's worse than making no effort.

Pretending to do science and using methodology that would not make it in a high school science fair is worse than not trying.

Regardless of their complaining, a proper experiment might take a week or more to run, and longer than that to design and get the design past review.

You would first need to establish that the listeners can, beyond doubt, hear any difference between cables. For that you need a lot of trials, run double blind. enough to generate some convincing statistics.

This isn't a new concept. Experimental psychologists have known about experimental design problems for over a century.

The first round doesn't require any qualitative judgments. Just whether two test runs are the same or different.

Skipping stuff like this and claiming significance with a handful of data points is just junk.

Not to mention, they simply dismissed the implications of outlying data, when that is the most important finding. You can't do that unless you have massive amounts of data.
 
js1138 said:
Actuall it's worse than making no effort.

Pretending to do science and using methodology that would not make it in a high school science fair is worse than not trying.

Regardless of their complaining, a proper experiment might take a week or more to run, and longer than that to design and get the design past review.

You would first need to establish that the listeners can, beyond doubt, hear any difference between cables. For that you need a lot of trials, run double blind. enough to generate some convincing statistics.

This isn't a new concept. Experimental psychologists have known about experimental design problems for over a century.

The first round doesn't require any qualitative judgments. Just whether two test runs are the same or different.

Skipping stuff like this and claiming significance with a handful of data points is just junk.

Not to mention, they simply dismissed the implications of outlying data, when that is the most important finding. You can't do that unless you have massive amounts of data.
Click to expand...

I'm so beyond over you guys that it boggles the mind. You treat what you think are scientific experiments from jokes like the Audio Critic as if it were the word of some deity and anything that disagrees with your preconceived notions of what is 'true' suddenly is worse than the subjectivity you so despise.

Its a &^%^%$ hobby about listening to music and you treat it likes its brain surgery. I read some of these threads and the arguments I get into and think I seriously need to reevaluate the direction my life is going- as in, I need to get one.
 
I don't recall mentioning the Audio Critic.

But I can attest that in medicine and public health there have been the scientific strains and the anecdotal strains.

Not much progress gets made without controlled experiments.

It's true that in pharmacology, the need for profit has turned "statistically significant" into "important." But that will happen anywhere. But in this business, we discuss claims of "black and white" differences.

Fine. Let's see some listeners demonstrate they can hear black and white differences between speaker wires in a well designed test.

I personally am so far from treating music listening like brain surgery that I can listen to almost any decent system and enjoy it.

The people who baffle me are people who think there a difference between which end of a speaker cable goes to the amp and which to the speaker. And people who buy stuff marketed that way.

The reason scientific testing is needed is to clear up this kind of BS.
 
You're not going to buy expensive speaker cables no matter what happens. And the person who does buy them, doesn't care about blind tests. Why do you need them done? Is it just so you can point fingers at others and call them deluded? Its not about advancing the state of anything, its about ego and feeling that you're right and others are wrong. Yet they buy their speaker cables, feel there's a difference whether there is one or not, and are happy about it. Why does that bother you so much?
 
Why do you need them done? Is it just so you can point fingers at others and call them deluded?
Click to expand...

Because I like truth. It's a habit.

I see no point in having discussions and debates in the absence of reliable information.

So when I see such pointless discussions I am motivated to point out that there are established ways of obtaining reliable information.

I find it really odd that a hobby that is totally dependent on the products of science and engineering would have so many people opposed to the kinds of research that made audio products possible.

What possible rationale is there for opposing competent research?
 
JohnVF said:
I'm so beyond over you guys that it boggles the mind. You treat what you think are scientific experiments from jokes like the Audio Critic as if it were the word of some deity and anything that disagrees with your preconceived notions of what is 'true' suddenly is worse than the subjectivity you so despise.

Its a &^%^%$ hobby about listening to music and you treat it likes its brain surgery. I read some of these threads and the arguments I get into and think I seriously need to reevaluate the direction my life is going- as in, I need to get one.
Click to expand...

What took you so long? :D

You know, it's summer. You could be sitting at Monroe Harbor watching people go by, or riding a bike, or having lunch at a nice out door cafe downtown, rather than endlessly arguing with people who will never change their minds.

Just sayin....
 
Last edited:
kirk57 said:
What took you so long? :D

You know, it's summer. You could be sitting at the harbor watching people go by, or riding a bike, or having lunch at a nice out door cafe downtown, rather than endlessly arguing with people who will never change their minds.

Just sayin....
Click to expand...

You're absolutely right. I've noticed that the more time I spend on AK lately, the less I enjoy this hobby, and listening to music. A bit counter productive, I think.
 
js1138 said:
I find it really odd that a hobby that is totally dependent on the products of science and engineering would have so many people opposed to the kinds of research that made audio products possible.

What possible rationale is there for opposing competent research?
Click to expand...

This from a person who has admitted to not having been in a hi fi store in years. Its ludicrous. You base your opinions on the state of the art. on zero first hand exposure to any of this stuff, and then get on a high horse about how much more correct you are in your assumptions than somebody who actually just listens to the end product.

Wait, didn't I just post that I'm over this silliness?

I just discovered my ignore list. I think we'll both be happier, JS.
 
Last edited:
This from a person who has admitted to not having been in a hi fi store in years.
Click to expand...

I don't need to visit stores to not that people who do listen to high end gear disagree with each other.

That's the starting point of knowledge. Asking why reasonable people disagree.

The low point of ignorance is hostility to asking the question and hostility to trying to find answers.
 
This thread may be too far gone with the science vs subjective debate to remain in TOL. It looks to me like it either needs dividing into two threads after asindc's post #90, and then maybe that part moved out of TOL, or it can just stay closed. That call is up to the forum mod, who may or may not feel like going through that much work.

Folks, please recall that the TOL rules prohibit exactly this kind of debate. TOL is for subjectivists, so they can dicuss their subjective impressions WITHOUT being told they're unscientific. Everywhere else on AK, the scientific argument is not only allowed, it's the norm, but not here in TOL. If you just can't stand being quiet while the subjectivists chat, don't come to TOL.
 
I am really sick and tired of this. This thread has turned exactly into what TOL is NOT about. Over and over and over I have posted about this, as have some of my co-mods and admins. NOTHING needs to be proven in TOL. It is just for discussion. If you can't accept that, then this is not the forum for you. Actually, there are obviously a few of you who cannot and will not accept what this forum is for. You somehow think you need to save others from themselves, or you get your kicks using "science" to try to make others wrong or negate their views or observations.
I have given a lot of latitude of late to people, hoping that maybe they would try to understand the point of this place and learn to play well with others. It is obvious now that it isn't going to happen. From now on I will moderate more aggressively again, and make sure that TOL serves the function it was designed for: the safe haven in AK for discussions of cables or any other tweak, without having to prove what you are hearing.
 
Just so there is no misunderstanding about Bigerik's use of the phrase "I will moderate more aggressively", that includes the possibility of him using his ability to remove access to TOL for an individual who as demonstrated a refusal to abide by the rules.

That makes TOL no different than any other forum in Audiokarma.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom