 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
64.231.119.247
In Reply to: You read rhetorically, my statement was literal. posted by Pat D on April 27, 2006 at 04:41:12:
Answer: Of course not!What's obvious is that many of the items JA mentions would be considered subtle changes by many an audiophile. For example the orientation of a cables' connected (at only one end) shield, i.e. if the connected shield is grounded at the source vs. destination side. Personally I would have thought that even in the general case such would be difficult to detect even in a non-controlled blind conditions setting.
But this only shows that blind tests *can* be utilized to detect such differences. That doesn't touch upon the issue of how practical such tests are, nor whether they have much interest to audiophiles in general.
Both topics have been discussed extensively here and hence there is no need to repeat. To do, in your case, would be an exercise in futility par excellence, specifically because you have demonstrated again and again that you are perfectly opaque to argument and even facts.
It seems to me that the objectivist method in cases such as JA's testimonial is to discredit the claims, witness the Jon Risch case. This is because the *only* results worth consideration are those that fit their narrative. The rest is a complete waste of time, no less so that attempting to reason with any type of fundamentalist zealot.
Hmmmm ...? Reflecting upon which I'm afraid I have to admit to no small embarrassment, but perhaps with effort I might prove not to be a lost cause, thus ... Goodbye Pat.
Follow Ups:
I am not responsible for what 'you' think might or might not be difficult. What I 'think' might be hard to hear is irrelevant, too, it's the results of the controlled blind auditions that count. One would also like some replication of some of the claims that have been made by JR and occasionally others.Also, I am not responsible if you fail to understand the problems. Assuming audibility is established, we want to know what the change to the signal was, and it's most probably something fairly basic, nothing esoteric. Maybe Mr. Atkinson knows: he should if he's really interested in the science--but typically, he doesn't publish measurements of cables and interconnects (Audioholics.com has). Personally, I wouldn't want an interconnect that sounded different from neutral ones.
Just because you think blind tests are not practical does not do anything to make sighted auditions reliable.
____________________________________________________________
"Nature loves to hide."
---Heraclitus of Ephesus (trans. Wheelwright)
in your experience? Naturally, I trust you did DBTs with dozens of other models in order to determine that.rw
Why is it up to me? If you say they're different, prove it.Meanwhile, such measurements as I have seen on some are way below the known JNDs and I see no reason to suspect very many are different--and I really wouldn't want them if they were. I'm open to evidence normally functioning interconnects sound different but no one seems to want to supply any.
____________________________________________________________
"Nature loves to hide."
---Heraclitus of Ephesus (trans. Wheelwright)
Personally, I wouldn't want an interconnect that sounded different from neutral ones.What did you mean by that?
rw
Read what I said again and it may come to you.What is unclear about it?
____________________________________________________________
"Nature loves to hide."
---Heraclitus of Ephesus (trans. Wheelwright)
1. Are your interconnects "neutral"?
2. If so, why?rw
You are asking me to prove the null hypothesis, which you know very well cannot be done. So you're questions are not really honest ones, they are simply rhetoric to justify your predilection for expensive audio jewellery. The real problem is to disprove the null hypothesis, and this you have utterly failed to do.
____________________________________________________________
"Nature loves to hide."
---Heraclitus of Ephesus (trans. Wheelwright)
So you chose your interconnects without having a clue as to whether or not they are neutral. While you said you would prefer choosing a neutral cable, you really have no idea.rw
First of all, I have said nothing about my interconnects being neutral. If they are not neutral, then I would want to know about it--except you have produced no evidence, no reason, why I should spend my time doubting that they are neutral.The sun rises every morning. Will the sun rise tomorrow? I have no reason to suppose that it won't, although it is possible to think of scenarios where it would not. Isaac Asimov wrote a novel, Nemesis, in which that was set to happen and the novel is about making sure the earth was saved from destruction. But I'm not seriously expecting it to happen right now.
____________________________________________________________
"Nature loves to hide."
---Heraclitus of Ephesus (trans. Wheelwright)
You said you prefer neutral cables. Ok. Sounds reasonable to me.My question remains: How do you know what is a neutral cable?
rw
You again have asked me to prove the null hypothesis. Why don't you get honest?
____________________________________________________________
"Nature loves to hide."
---Heraclitus of Ephesus (trans. Wheelwright)
All cables are assumed to be sonically neutral regardless of the significant variations in basic LRC parameters, materials construction, connectors, and degree of RF shielding until proven otherwise by virtue of DBTs.Hmmm. You might not actually be using a neutral cable, but are unable to prove that empirically since you cannot trust your ears. Uh oh! What to do?
rw
"All cables are assumed to be sonically neutral regardless of the significant variations in basic LRC parameters, materials construction, connectors, and degree of RF shielding until proven otherwise by virtue of DBTs."Do you have any evidence that my interconnects or most interconnects are built so badly that they mess up the signal sufficiently to be audible?
"Hmmm. You might not actually be using a neutral cable, but are unable to prove that empirically since you cannot trust your ears. Uh oh! What to do?"
If one does a blind audition, whose ears is one trusting? You wilfully misrepresent the truth.
Will the sun rise tomorrow?
____________________________________________________________
"Nature loves to hide."
---Heraclitus of Ephesus (trans. Wheelwright)
rw
.
____________________________________________________________
"Nature loves to hide."
---Heraclitus of Ephesus (trans. Wheelwright)
"nature loves to hide"Pat is a nature boy. He hides in the bushes ,and you'll need a bird dog to flush him out.
:-0
rw
"Pat is a nature boy. He hides in the bushes ,and you'll need a bird dog to flush him out."Truly hilarious! LOL
--
However, I suspect the bird dog would be ineffective. In Pat's case I suspect even Agent Orange would be likewise, and not just as a flushant. They don't call him "Pat D Invulnerable" for nothing!
I wish those nature boys would hide in the bushes. Traveling about Greece, my wife and I were treated to myriad nature worshippers whose motto appears to be, "If you got it, flaunt it." A little of that goes a long way.
Depends upon what "it" is!;-0
He seems to think that if he can catch me in a careless statement then that will prove that the differences between various interconnects, cables and such can normally be expected to be audible. He's just being silly.
____________________________________________________________
"Nature loves to hide."
---Heraclitus of Ephesus (trans. Wheelwright)
I don't think so, Pat.If a person believes that wires (interconnects) have no sonic effect on reproduction, then refering to a "neutral interconnect" is a redundancy. By definition, they are all neutral.
So, which is it: a defect in your writing or a defect in your thinking?
;-0 [trip!]
BTW, if you personally want to test this proposition, buy yourself a pair of DH Labs Bl-1 interconnects and a pair of Goertz Micropurl AG interconnects. They're both cheap, especially if you buy 1/2 meter length. It shouldn't be too difficult for you to set up at least an SBT of them. I make that suggestion in all seriousness because, until I replaced the DH Labs with the Goertz IC's I didn't think interconnects made any difference. Of course, the components I was connecting were different from the components you are using, so it still may not work. FWIW, the electrical characteristics of the two ICs are quite different. The Goertz wires are high capacitance, low inductance; and the DH Labs are higher inductance and probably relatively lower capacitance because of the differences in design.
Where have I said that every interconnect has no effect on the signal, let alone no audible effect? Anything can be built badly, but I have no reason whatever to think mine are or that selling price has much to do with it.
____________________________________________________________
"Nature loves to hide."
---Heraclitus of Ephesus (trans. Wheelwright)
simply trying to understand how you determined that a given cable is neutral or not.Evidently, you don't. You just say you like "neutral" cables.
rw
your formal Philosophy education, i.e. you must have been away the day they viewed The Matrix. Had you not, you would be perfectly aware ..."There is no B."
My statement was an 'if-then' type statement. But you have given me no reason to suspect they are not audibly neutral. You apparently have no reasons for doing so.
____________________________________________________________
"Nature loves to hide."
---Heraclitus of Ephesus (trans. Wheelwright)
That's equivalent to throwing a horse blanket over your speakers.Barry Manilow could sound like Frank Sinatra.
Frank Sinatra could sound like Tony Bennett.
k. d. lang could sound like Tiny Tim.
Sell all your audio equipment immediately and buy a Bose clock radio.
k.d lang sounds like Tiny Tim on ANY system.
MY stereo is better than YOUR stereo.
But really only by Annoyance Factor, not timbre or tone.HAF = High Annoyance Factor
Tiny Tim - HAF
k.d lang - HAF
Your posts - HAF :)Sorry... I'd better get back to my washroom attendant duties... even numbered stalls.
I've seen k. d. three times live.The Ingenue tour in the early 1990's showed me the best vocalist I've ever heard live (even compared with Ella Fitzgerald and Sarah Vaughan live, although well after their prime years). That was her peak and the slide down to mediocre songs, and too many slow ballads, has been steep since then.
The last concert a few years ago can be described as "if one slow ballad is good, then five in a row are better". Better for falling asleep in the audience perhaps, which I almost did in spite of the fact the treble was the brightest I've ever heard at a concert (we were in the middle of the auditorium) so we had to use earplugs even though the overall SPL was unusually reasonable.
YOU write them just so you can have the joy of refuting them. :)I don't like kd lang, you don't like Audioquest cables (or anything over 50 cents a foot, apparently) - there's no accounting for taste!
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
