Cables more hype than value?

Rok2id, Mr Randi's challenge is, as you allude to, was not about cables, but fear of failure. If I remember, correct me if I am wrong, you had to get 10 out of 10 changes correct.

A man was told to walk across a 10' long 2x4 which was laying on the ground for $20. He did so easily and collected his money. The board was then put across a 10' gap 10 stories high. He was told to walk across it again for the same money and he refused. It was the same easy walk, but the consequences of failure were higher.

I, and you too, could probably get close to 10 out of 10 with a fast/bright silver cable and a slow/ warm cable, but maybe I will get confused and fall 10 stories. It says nothing about the cables, just my fear.

Tobb, the cheap cables may sound better in your system ( lucky guy), but not in all systems. Reread what Al wrote. I'm glad you CAN hear the difference though. ;)

Acman3

Thanks for giving the chance to clarify my thoughts on wire.

The failure I alluded to in my previous post, refered to the reviewer at stereophile accepting the challenge to do the wire thingy, and then backing out. I do not know the details. I just postulated, that if he could not ID wire, how could he ever be a reviewer for a publication that believes in wire and in which he has many times tested, reviewed and sang the praises of many wire products. He would have lost his position / status in the audiophile community. You are right. The price of failure would have been high. And he didn't need perfection, just any rsult above guessing. The test is, can humans hear wire, not just one guru. Perfection was not required.

This challenge thing has been around for many years. It's nothing new. BUT, you cannot PROVE a negative. I cannot prove that I cannot hear wire. You can prove that you do hear wire. Therefore, the burden of proof in the wire debate is on those that say they CAN hear wire. And no one has proved it as of yet. No one is obligated to do so. But the fact reminds that no one has.

Back in the day, the definition of a perfect amp was, a straight piece of wire with gain. That means, the wire is just there to carry the signal. it adds nothing and takes away nothing. And if you could get gain, that is perfection! Of course no such amp exists. But that would be the 'perfect' amp. All you would have is a signal traveling thru wire and magically having an increase in amplitude. No noise / distortion. Nothing!

NOW, we don't need some guy with a challenge and a million bucks. We can all do this at home. Just have a person that lives with you, change or not change your wire everyday. It must be so you cannot SEE any difference. Both of you keep notes. Compare notes after a week, a month, a year or even a decade. Then you will KNOW if you can hear wire. You can even listen to the same CD/LP which should give you an advantage. To make it even fairer, use the best audiophile wire avaliable vs say, 10awg blue jeans. Take your time there is no rush. See how often you picked the correct wire, or could even tell when the wire had been changed!

This is getting sort of long, so to close.

Think about human hearing. Think about hearing at certain ages. Think about hearing these so-called differences while music is being played. Think that seldom does one say wire sounds better, just different. How does guru wire change your listening perception of your copy of Beethoven's 9th, as opposed to the non guru wire? Just think. Remember people cannot even ID different amps and cd players with all the components involved. How can they ID a simple piece of wire?
And lastly. How do the scam artists explain the reasons for all these benefits of their product? What do they do to the wire to make your soundstage wider? Change freq response?
Sorry I was so long winded. I could go on, but won't. Unless you have questions.

Cheers

Rok2id.

That was an awesome post. The episode you reference was one of my most favorite of that entire series.

research it people and watch the episode. It is probably out on youtube. It is a million times better then going through another cable value debate.

Rok2id..'think about hearing these so-called difference while music is being played'......i will assure you i can hear any and every change in my system when i add or change cables..why..because it is a highly resolving system and it is the only one i listen to day after day.if you are speaking from experience as to your not being able to hear the diffenece in your system then it just might be that YOUR system is not resolving enough to hear differences in cables.'scam artists'....that's pretty harsh. there are hundreds, if not thousands, of cable companies each one trying to create a better cable.'scam artists'...i think not!..is Porsche a 'scam artist when all they make are $100k + automobiles when you could easily buy a Kia.?...i will assure you you will know the difference when you drive both.

The level of cynicism directed at those who believe they can hear differences in cables that others can't, or won't, is a fascinating phenomenon to me. It must be rooted in some kind of personal insecurity on the part of those who can' or won't; and in the case of the most common targets, audio reviewers, my long-held belief in "reviewer envy". Here, again, we have one more example of the cynics (Rok) jumping on an opportunity to put down a believer or reviewer. The question that I find most interesting is: Why does it matter so much to the non-believers, that others believe?

The details of the Randi challenge, as described above, are totally incorrect. I think that Acman is correct in that the motivation for withdrawal of the challenge was probably "fear of failure", but for reasons that are not so obvious. The facts are (were) these:

It was NOT Fremer (reviewer) who backed out of the challenge. The first obstacle was put up by (surprise!) Randi, who refused to let Fremer use his own reference cables (the logical choice) for comparison. Randi expressed a concern that Fremer's cables might be "tweaked" to provide Fremer with "cues" for their identity. Then, after some other nonsense put up by Randi, it was Pear (?) Cable's chief who then refused to supply the cables for comparison to some cheap Monster cable in a double blind test. You see, Randi's challenge was not about wether someone could distinguish between two sets of cables. It was supposed to be about wether someone could tell cheap Monster cable from a specific multi-thousand $ cable of Randi's choosing; I think it was Pear Cable.