audiophiles get mention in today's WSJournal

"financial" is the keyword........

"Seriously, why would I listen to a guy whose medium is dead??"

Well, let's see. The print edition of the WSJ, just in these United States, has a circulation of more than 1.6 million. The online edition has a million paid subscribers. (One can't simply add those numbers to reach a total, as there is some overlap.) If you don't want to listen to a reporter because you don't like what he writes, that's just fine. But I should think that his medium is quite alive and well. And, no, I don't work for the Journal, though I do subscribe to the online edition. And I own only four turntables, though that's another matter.

OK, I'm an audiophile. I admit it. But for me to go in and compare two different speaker cables in a system and, just as importantly, in a room I'm not familiar with is a tall order. There are simply too many sonic variables that are new that would preclude me from reliably discerning the subtle yet often very meaningful differences cables can make.

Now, put me in front of a system that I'm very familiar with and I'd be happy to take that test. I think the approach taken in the test, while on the surface seeming very valid, just doesn't work in trying to identify the fine differences cables can make. I agree the differences between speaker cables are small on an absolute level (and much larger for interconnects in my experience), but once you're happy with the rest of your system the right cables can really bring things together (or not). This is something you can only assess over time in the context of your own room, system, and tastes -- not something you can readily assess in a completely unfamiliar situation.

One analogy to the non-audiophile world might be like tires on a Ferrari. For the person who views cars as transportation they might be just as happy (or even moreso) with Sears Roadhandlers on wet roads as with a $3000 set of performance tires. But being able to compare the two over time and through a variety of situations the differences become much more meaningful and significant. This, to me, is very similar to how cables become imporant within the context of an audio system.

Then again, I can certainly see that it's much easier to just dismiss cables as a scam. To each his or her own.

I caught the article on the train tonight and found it both funny and a lot better than most non-audiophile pieces about audiophiles -- the mere fact he mentioned that listening over time can draw out differences in gear was impressive. Of course he missed things that a person with deeper knowledge will understand (e.g., the crucial importance of synergy to cables), but at least he demonstrated an awareness that there are things like expensive turntables out there.

Michael Fremer's article in the February issue Stereophile talks about these types of comparison tests. What the reporters and skeptics fail to take into consideration is that we are listening to MUSIC over a SYSTEM, in a listening ENVIRONMENT, which means there is a world of interacting emotions, thoughts, physical/technological factors and other tangible and intangible variables (e.g, our own personal histories with a particular piece of music) simultaneously interacting that result in a gestalt experience when listenting to music reproduction. Change the variables and you've changed the experience.
In business we talk about findings that are statistically significant and that are managerially significant. Some finding might not reach the point of being statistically significant, but managers might still act on it because it is "meaningful" to them. Conversely, some finding might be statistically significant, but it is not managerially significant, and lacks "meaning". It is the same with listening tests. We can, and do, extract "meaning" from music that goes beyond conscious thought, and certainly beyond statistical results from listenting to unfamimlar music through unfamiliar equipment in an unfamiliar setting where "meaning" is non-existent.
All in all, I learn nothing surprising or of value from the article.