advertisement


Yiiiiiihaaa!!! The 20'000 UKP power cable is here!

I reserve the right to ignore such challenges. Subjective is subjective. When a number of people reach similar conclusions that's consensus. As for the quest for certainty I really couldn't give a toss.
 
I reserve the right to ignore such challenges. Subjective is subjective. When a number of people reach similar conclusions that's consensus. As for the quest for certainty I really couldn't give a toss.

Does that mean you will not post any responses to challenges or are you looking for the best of both worlds?
Request can you use IMHO more often to help you remember.
 
I reserve the right to ignore such challenges. Subjective is subjective. When a number of people reach similar conclusions that's consensus. As for the quest for certainty I really couldn't give a toss.

That's not much to go on, is it?

Most people who get into hi-fi spend more on it than anything apart from perhaps a mortgage, a car and (in the event they breed) their kids. Sometimes more on hi-fi than anything else in their lives. And you are basing that substantial outlay on a thin gruel of 'I am right, ignore anything that disputes that.'

Would you see a financial advisor and hand over the sort of money you have spent on hi-fi to someone who had such a laissez faire approach to financial management? Actually, given what the UK did and continues to do to its own coffers right now, that's probably a question that doesn't need answering.
 
I reserve the right to ignore such challenges. Subjective is subjective. When a number of people reach similar conclusions that's consensus. As for the quest for certainty I really couldn't give a toss.
Sounds like religion to me. On that basis, christianity is the only true religion, as is islam, as is judaism, and if a muslim is martyred in the cause of islam he goes to heaven and is accompanied by 72 virgins. So that's a consensus then. Only chistianity, judaism and islam are the one true religion.

Er, hang on.
 
Is there any field -- outside of audio -- where expensive after-market cables are considered upgrades worth pursuing?

As an example, my previous employer bought a three-quarter of a million dollar Zeiss confocal microscope, but the power cord was just a standard grey IEC. Zeiss offers many upgrade options (fancy oil-immersion lenses, fluorescent dyes, etc.), so the basic unit can be upgraded, but no where in the options list do you see a better power cord.

In the video below you can see some of the cords. Note the lack of elephantine girth, chainmail and wooden blocks.


Yes, I know. A precision microscope working at the limits of physics is not an audio amplifier or a CD player, but you'd think that if a better cord was such an obvious place for improvement Zeiss's engineers would have considered it.

Joe

P.S. Cable talk is NOT verboten here. pink fish's AUP is about forum behaviour, not content.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That's just because Zeiss don't make lenses that are good enough to resolve the difference a quality power cord would make, Joe.:p
 
I reserve the right to ignore such challenges. Subjective is subjective. When a number of people reach similar conclusions that's consensus. As for the quest for certainty I really couldn't give a toss.

And that is the end of any debate. People reserve the right to believe whatever they want, however strange, because they can believe it. It does not matter that there is no proof, no evidence, no measurement because even if there were they would still believe and spend loads of cash to support what they know to be true.
 
Steve,

That's just because Zeiss don't make lenses that are good enough to resolve the difference a quality power cord would make, Joe.:p
That must be it. I will alert Zeiss's engineers.

Joe
 
And that is the end of any debate. People reserve the right to believe whatever they want, however strange, because they can believe it. It does not matter that there is no proof, no evidence, no measurement because even if there were they would still believe and spend loads of cash to support what they know to be true.

I am cool with that. With subjective reviewing there are no guarantees but if you find that your experience has previously concurred with that of the reviewer then the review is worth paying attention to and by that I mean trying these things for yourself.

The only relevant challenge to a subjective viewpoint is another whose experience does not concur with it.

Try before you part with your cash and your mileage may vary.

There is also the risk of placebo effect etc.
 
But that is the point. It is not a reasoned argument. The subjectivist view is not backed by any evidence other than blind faith.

Chris

So, let's flip this around and have look at it from another angle.
Let's assume that, tomorrow, someone came up with conclusive, objective proof that power cables did make a difference to sound quality. Would the current cable sceptics then hear a difference?
 
I think you are living in cloud cuckoo land.

You don't think the big companies like nordost have tried? (and failed)

Flawed logic and supposition will not help your cause.

In the past there have been blind tests that proved no difference, but then all of a sudden the tests are declared null by the believers as they say they were 'stressed' ahhh diddums.
 
So, let's flip this around and have look at it from another angle.
Let's assume that, tomorrow, someone came up with conclusive, objective proof that power cables did make a difference to sound quality. Would the current cable sceptics then hear a difference?

I try not too get into these never ending threads but... That's the kakest argument ever heard even on here :D:D
 
So, let's flip this around and have look at it from another angle.
Let's assume that, tomorrow, someone came up with conclusive, objective proof that power cables did make a difference to sound quality. Would the current cable sceptics then hear a difference?

If the evidence supporting the objective statements was both robust and repeatable, of course. That's how it works.

Given such evidence would lead to having to re-write a lot of what we currently know about electronics, psychoacoustics and the robustness of existing tests, I think I'd be justified in saying 'extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence'.

As such, 'robust and repeatable' would have to mean any test that did provide evidence that power cables made a difference would need to be thoroughly evaluated to eliminate any potential errors or biases on the parts of test subjects, tester and test administrator. It would need to be thoroughly repeatable, using a different team in a different test facility. And it would need to stand up to a set of objective standards you don't normally see outside of academe, such as statistical confidence and peer review.

Smoke and mirrors, a couple of quick blasts of music and a white paper just wouldn't cut it.
 
I try not too get into these never ending threads but... That's the kakest argument ever heard even on here :D:D

Why? Is it because sceptics would then need to accept that there are differences and that would F**k with their current view of the world.
 


advertisement


Back
Top