Do materials alter frequencies and speed?

>>I'm asking you to put your own listening skills and system to the test and
tell me the results.<<

You cannot test anyone's listening skills until you have proven there is
something to hear.

You don't have such proof.

Instead, you have an unproven claim.

You claimed you could hear .1 db down at 20Khz.

Your idea of how to test this is to send ME cables?

That's like sending me 10,000 pounds to see if YOU can lift it.

>>If the cables sound different and YOU<<

I could listen to those cables, fall on my knees and say, "wow -- these cables
sure do sound different!" And it won't do anything to help you back up your
claim that you can hear .1db down at 20Khz.

If you want to prove you can hear .1db down at 20Khz, it would be easy to
design a test, but YOU would obviously be the one taking it -- since YOU
made the claim.

Dude -- this is all just basic logic.

We're not debating whether cables can sound DIFFERENT. We're debating
whether you can hear .1db down at 20 Khz.

We both know you cannot.

It was a ridiculous claim.

Since you cannot hear .1db down at 20Khz, any theory based on this premise
is obviously flawed and must be revised because -- obviously -- the building
blocks of your theory must be provable or else you have nothing.

Back to the drawing board.

We've beaten this to death.

That's it for me.

Thanks for the chat.

Rsbeck: If the cables measure the same, they'll sound the same. If they sound different, and you are honest about hearing a difference, then there must be some way to quantify what you hear. It is that simple and my method keeps it simple.

Your method introduces other variables such as some type of a switchbox and additional cabling necessary to perform such a task into the equation. Not only can this taint the results due to "contaminating" the circuit, it alters the impedance and current distribution along the signal path. Since cabling does introduce distributed electrical characteristics along the conducting path, adding a switchbox and a different type of cable before the switchbox into the listening path DEFINITELY changes what one would measure and potentially hear without such variables into the signal path. That's because the switchbox and connecting cable will all introduce their unique impedances and multiple additional connections into the equation whereas they wouldn't be there normally. All of this is verifiable and measurable IF you have the right equipment( Time Domain Reflectometer ). Obviously, the people believing that an ABX box introduces no variables into such a situation are lacking the proper test equipment and knowledge to verify such things and / or have been lying to the general public on purpose about such things.

Swapping cables manually at the amp one at a time definitely keeps the path "purer" for such a comparison with the only variable being one's own listening skills, auditory memory and level of integrity. As mentioned above, i'm willing to trust your listening skills and integrity under the conditions that YOU choose to make when conducting such a test using equipment that you are very familiar with in a room that you are very familiar with using a recording that you are familiar with. Sean
>

In fact, there IS a very simple cable wire experiment. Take an appropriate length of enameled pure copper wire (~16g), cut into four identical pieces, scrape off enamel at the 8 ends, and use that wire to connect amp->spkrs. There should be a perceptible sonic difference if you're now using multistrand wire. You can even connect these wires in the direction they come off the spool, or cross, or whatever floats one's boat:)!

Gregm: No need for someone such as Rsbeck to go through all of that. I've offered multitudes of times to let him borrow some cables with me covering transportation charges round trip. Sean
>

What is the resonant frequency of earwax?
I'm going to connect my turntable to my cochlear imlants and skip the rest of the system.