advertisement


Telegraph - Cables Do Make A Difference!

He states that the tests weren't "double blind" because he could see which cable he was listening to.

Oh dear, no much of a clue has he?

He's told by an independent expert that “Good quality, highly conductive copper is cheap to produce, so an ordinary Hi-Fi cable has got very good conductivity anyway.” A psychologist then explains the placebo effect to him.

Armed with this knowledge (I use the term as loosely as it's possible to use the term) he does some sighted listening tests and finds a slight preference for the £45 cable over the cheap one, and a marginal preference for the £125 over that. But, because he's not gullible the £800 cable sounds the same!

Oh dear, oh dear.
 
Well I'm happy to have the argument again. :)

Matthew Sparkes is an idiot. Or it was published on 1st April and the name was a clue?
 
You have picked up on your personal prejudices , so I will do the same . The most interesting thing for me is the difference he heard between the cheap and the reasonably priced one . Accepting he is telling the truth , then these are differences mirror my own experience and those of lots of people . Furthermore they were immediate, obvious and repeatable .

And they relate to issues of information retrieval , Not " feel the bass on this 99.9999% pure copper man .
 
Gerald, I am loathe to argue with such a decent chap as yourself :) My point was that he didn't even understand what "double blind" means, and after being told by a psychologist that the placebo effect can make your hear things that aren't actually there goes on to do a sighted test - and finds a difference. Aaargghhhh!
 
Gerald said:
Accepting he is telling the truth , then these are differences mirror my own experience and those of lots of people .
Click to expand...

He may be telling the truth, but that doesn't mean the differences were real.

But we've been here before many many times.
 
Does anyone actually care any more? I personally think that, if people heard a difference, they heard a difference. Whether that difference was there in reality has nothing to do with the price of fish. Just so long as I'm not expected to hear the difference I'm happy and I'll continue with my collection of freebees from Japanese cassette recorders, bailing wire and bits of wet string.
 
That was the narrative structure he chose to employ , it is common amongst investigating journalists . You outline the various theories and then do an empirical test , the positioning of psychologist last was mischievous or unfortunate .

As an aside what she said was naïve simplistic bollocks , it was tantamount to a provocative soundbite as opposed to an explanation.

From the narrative , you can be in no doubt that the author is of the opinion that the cables presented the music differently and DO MAKE A DIFFERENCE .

Just as we no longer believe the earth is flat , it is high time "cables make no difference" is assigned to the dustbin of "ideas only patients as defined by the 2005 mental capacity act" advocate :D

Edit , alas I see two patients intervened between me and you vital . Don't go to the doctors gents .
 
I hear many differences with cables, but whether I've heard £1000 worth of differences is quite another thing.
 
tones said:
Does anyone actually care any more? I personally think that, if people heard a difference, they heard a difference. Whether that difference was there in reality has nothing to do with the price of fish. Just so long as I'm not expected to hear the difference I'm happy and I'll continue with my collection of freebees from Japanese cassette recorders, bailing wire and bits of wet string.
Click to expand...

Do you use distilled water on your wet string? I find it gives a more lush sound.
 
The article wasn't entirely full of bollox:

He said that the average person seeking better sound quality would have more luck experimenting with the position of their speakers than buying expensive cables. The difference doing this makes can be “tremendous” and costs nothing but the “domestic inconvenience” of having them in the optimum spot acoustically, rather than practically.
Click to expand...

Firstly, he told me that claims of higher quality made regarding digital cables like HDMI and USB cables are all “total nonsense”. The only real problem that could occur is a reflection of the signal bouncing back from the end of the cable, creating a spurious signal. Such problems are avoided by ensuring what is termed "impedance matching" and this has no bearing on cost - all modern cables do this equally effectively.

“A cheap cable costing you £5 will perform no better or no worse than a cable costing orders of magnitude more,” he said.
Click to expand...
 
Vital said:
Well I'm happy to have the argument again. :)

Matthew Sparkes is an idiot. Or it was published on 1st April and the name was a clue?
Click to expand...
"Armed with all of this background, the proof is still in the pudding."
It is quite funny. Deputy Head of Technology and half-wit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top