advertisement


[Poll] A poll on whether Power Cords make a difference

Do Power Cords Make A Difference?

  • Yes they do make a difference

    Votes: 145 39.8%
  • No they don't make a difference

    Votes: 166 45.6%
  • I don't know

    Votes: 53 14.6%

  • Total voters
    364
Not being a mind-reader I can't tell if or when a maker/seller is deliberately telling porkies or knowingly bullshitting. So without a clear reason, I can't doubt their sincerity. People believe all kinds of things - sometimes rightly, sometimes in error.

However as an engineer/physicist I can notice when their 'technical explanations' are nonsense, or MOOM, and when they seem to have no idea of *relevant* engineering differences which could explain something, but do so without a need for a significant hike in the cost of a product. This does, at least, help clear away some of the clutter and may make it easier to focus on any interesting cases where something 'new' may be found.
 
It seems clear that in quite a few cases we are constantly being "persuaded" by marketing material to buy things that either have no comprehensible impact or have an impact below human perception thresholds. Even so it's also clear to me that when matters are above human perception thresholds, it's still the case that one man's "night and day" difference is another's "too subtle to matter".

Many people that buy audiophile mains cables report hearing differences when the sound field is not being changed by an amount that can be identified by listening alone. If you accept this as fact which would seem unavoidable given the large numbers of people that report hearing differences on threads like this how does this fit into your analysis of what is going on?
 
Many people that buy audiophile mains cables report hearing differences when the sound field is not being changed by an amount that can be identified by listening alone. If you accept this as fact which would seem unavoidable given the large numbers of people that report hearing differences on threads like this how does this fit into your analysis of what is going on?

Placebo effect/purchase justification.
 
Many people ............... report hearing differences when the sound field is not being changed by an amount that can be identified by listening alone.

What does this mean? Could you possibly put it another way so that I understand what you are trying to get across ?
 
Bill Low, the Audioquest CEO, said that he would fully investigate the doctored video and how it was produced. However, to my knowledge he has not revealed any details. All we know is that the Audioquest employee who featured in the video subsequently left the company. Oh and we also know (because he said so himself) that Bill Low was aware of the problem with the video one year before the problem became public and he admitted it. During that time he chose not to do anything about it. Which is hardly surprising from a commercial point of view.

The question asked by duckworp was: is there any evidence of cable manufacturers admitting malfeasance in the marketing of cables? The answer is unambiguously and wholly unsurprisingly: yes. I say 'unsurprisingly' because of (a) the high level of ignorance in the market about how electronics work, and (b) the commercial imperatives that structure the market.

It certainly is more complicated than I remembered.

But I don't think Duckworp's question was about anyone admitting an instance when malfeasance in the marketing of cables occurred.

I think his question was that if a conspiracy to delude audiophools exists between manufacturers, stores and journalists as they know that cables in fact have no impact in sound quality why hasn't anyone come forward about it...
 
Placebo effect.
Which means what? Do they hear a difference or don't they? Is hearing this difference in some way second class or is like hearing a difference between sound fields that are changed by amounts that can be identified by listening alone? If they are first class differences then what value should be placed on audiophile cable marketing for those that are able to hear differences in main cables?
 
Many people that buy audiophile mains cables report hearing differences when the sound field is not being changed by an amount that can be identified by listening alone. If you accept this as fact which would seem unavoidable given the large numbers of people that report hearing differences on threads like this how does this fit into your analysis of what is going on?
I wouldn't think of suggesting that what I posted is a reliable analysis of what is going on.

However I would have thought that point (1), where my personal experience is that in reality (i.e. not in the world of marketing) human perception is not completely reliable, might cover the point (unless I have misunderstood the question).
 
What does this mean? Could you possibly put it another way so that I understand what you are trying to get across ?
I mean they cannot identify which cable is in use by listening when blind. This doesn't mean they are not continuing to hear differences when blind because some people report continuing to do so.
 
Which means what? Do they hear a difference or don't they? Is hearing this difference in some way second class or is like hearing a difference between sound fields that are changed by amounts that can be identified by listening alone? If they are first class differences then what value should be placed on audiophile cable marketing for those that are able to hear differences in main cables?

They are not, but think they do. However it their money and up to the individual how they spend it.
 
Many people that buy audiophile mains cables report hearing differences when the sound field is not being changed by an amount that can be identified by listening alone. If you accept this as fact which would seem unavoidable given the large numbers of people that report hearing differences on threads like this how does this fit into your analysis of what is going on?

Feel ing part of a group? One of the gang? Belonging to those who know?

There is a forum that had many mains cable excitements until the Gang Leader fell out with the Mains Cable Retailer who was in favour. Now they are hardly mentioned. It is a forum that is very gang, friendly orientated. I hope I am allow to make that factual observation.

For anyone placing value on the poll it is creeping upwards and may even go over the magic 40% which will not go unmentioned I suspect.
 
Busted !.. my mistake...I have studiously kept a mental note on which threads I am reading at any one time..there are so many .. slipped up on this one.
Wont happen again.
In defence ... I was merely asking for clarification of a point to more fully understand the point being made. I posted no opinion.
 
Feel ing part of a group? One of the gang? There is a forum that had many mains cable excitements until the Gang Leader fell out with the Mains Cable Retailer who was in favour. Now they are hardly mentioned. It is a forum that is very gang, friendly orientated.
Does this mean they are not hearing differences or that they are hearing differences and it is feeling part of a gang that is in some way helping to create their hearing differences?
 
No one claims a conspiracy, it doesn't need one. I thought this had been kicked out the park?
The Cosmetics industry isn't a conspiracy, it's a business answering a demand in the market place for miracle face creams that can give you "visibly improved results after 8 weeks, look up to 8 years younger", "48 out of 74 women we polled say they noticed a difference..."
Once the demand dies down they launch a new one with added plutonium or some such ;-) and the cycle starts all over again. Boutique brands charge silly money and Boots No7 charges a few quid for essentially the same gear. Try telling your other half she's kidding herself........;-)
 
Does this mean they are not hearing differences or that they are hearing differences and it is feeling part of a gang that is in some way helping to create their hearing differences?
Group behaviour. Who knows but the much mentioned Mains Cable experience is now seldom mentioned. I wonder why that is. Do any of those forum members know? People who disagree with the Gang Leader are not welcomed with warm open arms.
 
How does thinking one hears something differ from actually hearing something?

Put it like this in a genuine blind test would anyone be able to hear differences......the answer would be unequivocally no. Now if any one here can come up with scientific And repeatable information as to how we should hear differences I am all ears.
 
Put it like this in a genuine blind test would anyone be able to hear differences......the answer would be unequivocally no.
I gave a reference earlier to Mike Lavigne preparing to take Randi's million dollar cable challenge where he continued to hear the sighted differences when listening blind. This is not unexpected: some will continue to hear sighted differences and some will not. I am not aware of a good reference to the latter - anyone? The problem is that when subjective audiophiles consider themselves to have "failed" a blind listening test they are confused and upset because they know they heard differences before. This is unlikely to lead to a dispassionate public reporting of what they heard blind.
 
So from reading the comments of anti-cable people it seems to me that, according to the 47% anti-cable peeps, the reason that 40% of people hear a difference is due to the following massive conspiracy theory:
sometime in the 1990s speaker/interconnect cable manufacturers (and some hifi component manufactures) conspired to design power cords which they knew had absolutely no effect on SQ, but they had the potential to boost the balance sheet in the tough times that were emerging. This concept was then sold to dealers, who bought into the idea due to the high margins available on sales of the cables. The power cable idea is then sold to journalists, who bought into the conspiracy as it meant more advertising income from ads for the cables. All three parts of the conspiracy - the manufacturers, the dealers and the journalists - agreed to keep the truth from anyone else so that the concept could be sold to the hifi enthusiasts, who fell foul of the hifi manufacturers evil ways through expectation bias. And to this very day no one in this chain of conspiracy ever broke ranks to tell the truth.

It certainly is more complicated than I remembered.

But I don't think Duckworp's question was about anyone admitting an instance when malfeasance in the marketing of cables occurred.

I think his question was that if a conspiracy to delude audiophools exists between manufacturers, stores and journalists as they know that cables in fact have no impact in sound quality why hasn't anyone come forward about it...

Again, Bill Low, CEO of Audioquest, has admitted that a marketing video for Audioquest HDMI cables was doctored in such a way as to deceive customers into thinking Audioquest HDMI cables made a real sonic difference. We know that a major Audioquest store and an Audioquest employee (their sales manager for the south-western USA) were involved in the making of the video. So, a clear admission of collusion between manufacturers and stores to 'delude' (as you put it) customers.

I agree this doesn't tick all three of duckworp's boxes (manufacturers, stores, journalists), but two out of three is pretty good. And it's also worth noting that the person who originally broke this story, Mark Waldrep, was subsequently attacked several times in the audiophile press. Shoot the messenger.
 


advertisement


Back
Top