advertisement


The Myth of Cables?

The other point I realised many years ago is that even if I play the same source material twice, making no changes, it often "sounds different" the second time to the first.

All kinds of reasons for this, from changes in human physiology prompted by the previous exposure, through now noticing details you missed the first time, to your head being in a sligntly different place because you aren't wearing a head-clamp.

So it was no surprise to me when some tests showed that if you asked people to tell if two playing were 'same' or 'different' they were more likely to say 'different' even when the same things was played in the same way.

This all sets a background level of variation in how we think something sounds. Can easily lead (pun alert!) to someone concluding that something "made a difference".

So yes, I'm sure that in some cases a change of cable may cause an audible alteration, and may be an improvement. But in general I don't hear changes when I've tried this that get above the level of the above. There are exceptions, but I find that something like a slight shift of the listening seat or speakers makes a much more noticable change.

All that said, I've never claimed or though I have 'golden ears'. And I have never tried to review things. One of my concerns about magazine reviews is that since I don't use their system in their room and may not share their taste, I have no confidence I'd agree with them even when I accept they are reliably reporting what they heard or preferred.

FWIW I've spent *years* trying to check and make sense of all kind of fancy 'effects' and 'theories' people put forwards for why adding unobtainium makes an expensive cable sound good. So far I've not found much that stands up. But this, of course, may just sometimes be the vendors jumping on the wrong reason for something out of ignorance.
 
Jim Audiomisc said:
The other point I realised many years ago is that even if I play the same source material twice, making no changes, it often "sounds different" the second time to the first.

All kinds of reasons for this, from changes in human physiology prompted by the previous exposure, through now noticing details you missed the first time, to your head being in a sligntly different place because you aren't wearing a head-clamp.

So it was no surprise to me when some tests showed that if you asked people to tell if two playing were 'same' or 'different' they were more likely to say 'different' even when the same things was played in the same way.

This all sets a background level of variation in how we think something sounds. Can easily lead (pun alert!) to someone concluding that something "made a difference".

Before anyone steps in....yes, eyes tight shut with not a clue as to which cables was in place, done on a rota, many times.

So yes, I'm sure that in some cases a change of cable may cause an audible alteration, and may be an improvement. But in general I don't hear changes when I've tried this that get above the level of the above. There are exceptions, but I find that something like a slight shift of the listening seat or speakers makes a much more noticable change.

All that said, I've never claimed or though I have 'golden ears'. And I have never tried to review things. One of my concerns about magazine reviews is that since I don't use their system in their room and may not share their taste, I have no confidence I'd agree with them even when I accept they are reliably reporting what they heard or preferred.

FWIW I've spent *years* trying to check and make sense of all kind of fancy 'effects' and 'theories' people put forwards for why adding unobtainium makes an expensive cable sound good. So far I've not found much that stands up. But this, of course, may just sometimes be the vendors jumping on the wrong reason for something out of ignorance.
Click to expand...
Works both ways, though doubt many would not notice the change in sound from the van damme to Grey in my Naim set up, it's not one of those "subtle, so what's the point" moments.
 
Jim Audiomisc said:
The other point I realised many years ago is that even if I play the same source material twice, making no changes, it often "sounds different" the second time to the first.

All kinds of reasons for this, from changes in human physiology prompted by the previous exposure, through now noticing details you missed the first time, to your head being in a sligntly different place because you aren't wearing a head-clamp.

So it was no surprise to me when some tests showed that if you asked people to tell if two playing were 'same' or 'different' they were more likely to say 'different' even when the same things was played in the same way.

This all sets a background level of variation in how we think something sounds. Can easily lead (pun alert!) to someone concluding that something "made a difference".

So yes, I'm sure that in some cases a change of cable may cause an audible alteration, and may be an improvement. But in general I don't hear changes when I've tried this that get above the level of the above. There are exceptions, but I find that something like a slight shift of the listening seat or speakers makes a much more noticable change.
Click to expand...
Exactly. A simple point which properly understood cuts through a good chunk of argument on this forum. For some reason though very few people get it.
 
radamel said:
Yes. Purite doesn't seem too worried about drowning.
Click to expand...
Apologies Radamel, this one is for Jim Audiomusic, hit the wrong post....

I suppose you can aim this at any piece of equipment, am i wrong?

If you sit in front of your hifi, eyes closed, then open them, the sound does change, takes 10 seconds of anyone's time to try out. Have a good hard look at your speakers while listening too, then close your eyes, the colour & size of your speakers will affect your listening.
Cables are a little trickier, as you can't see them :)
 
Ragaman said:
Works both ways.
Click to expand...

Not really. One might think so if all we had was the results of sighted listening that would show that the cable sceptics don't hear any differences but cable believers do (but even then we wouldn't know what the real story is). But we also have a large number of controlled double blind listening tests where people who could tell a difference in a sighted test failed to do so when blind.

Of course the handy way to ignore that is to simply declare "all blind tests are flawed", but that is a bit like the clairvoyant declaring his/her powers don't work when sceptics are present.
 
Time for a Bake Off the Wigwams full of them, Any Old Sound is starting.

Get some hearers and none hearers together and share the cable experience. Lets see what happens when one cook is deafened by the difference and another is saying what difference?

Solo experiences proclaimed volubly on a forum are futile. Lets get some joint experiences.
 
whatsnext said:
Get some hearers and none hearers together and share the cable experience. Lets see what happens when one cook is deafened by the difference and another is saying what difference?
Click to expand...

Unfortunately it often falls down on not being able to agree on a format/protocol.

Solo experiences proclaimed volubly on a forum are futile.
Click to expand...

Indeed.
 
The referenced article states:
"The jump between the cheap cable and the £45 Atlas Element was clear: you could suddenly make out small breath and lip-smacking sounds from the singer which had previously been hidden (which was actually a little unpleasant) and the bass was noticeably stronger and rounder. Things revealed themselves from within the music that were lost somewhere along the length of the cheapest cable."
This is my experience with budget cables (which are by all reasonable measurement adequate) and decent ones. If we just focus on the quoted paragraph, I suppose we are split here between those that think he is deluded, and those who think it is reasonable. I can't see any way for the two sides to agree, and no end of debate will change anyone's mind. We can only speak from our own experiences, which are clearly different.
 
I often take my glasses off to listen to music. Just as I often dim down the lighting. I doubt there is anything particularly magic about either. I *guess* taking my glasses off might change my 'head transfer function'. But it might just as easily reduce the pressure on my ears or mean I moved my head a little. And not being able to see so clearly may simply help my brain to concentrate on what I hear.
 
I have no issue with proper double-blind comparisons because if the eyes influence perception of audio, we should dem kit blind if we want to minimize bias. It might even save you some dough.

But what do you do afterward? It's not like when you're listening at home it will be blind. You'll know exactly what's in your system and presumably the biases will resurface, influencing your perception.

Joe
 
But if you have determined through an unsighted comparison that the ( insert component) makes absolutely no difference then you can easily dismiss the feelings of audiophilia nervosa.
Keith
 
Joe P said:
I have no issue with proper double-blind comparisons because if the eyes influence perception of audio, we should dem kit blind if we want to minimize bias. It might even save you some dough.

But what do you do afterward? It's not like when you're listening at home it will be blind. You'll know exactly what's in your system and presumably the biases will resurface, influencing your perception.

Joe
Click to expand...

How about buying said double blind listened too kit then having ya eyes removed? sounds logical dunnit
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top