I stream music via TIDAL and the only cable in my system that is not an "Audiophile" cable is the one going from my Gateway to my PC, it is a CAT6 cable. Question is, do "Audiophile" Ethernet cables make any difference/ improvement in sound quality?
Any and all feedback is most appreciated, especially if you noted improvements in your streaming audio SQ with a High-End Ethernet cable.
gdhal"I understand you are now attempting to "save face"
by pretending you have misunderstood what it is you and I have been
discussing." Ask yourself why have I insisted on lawyers, a
contract and an escrow account. It is to avoid any misunderstanding by
clarifying the details in writing and be in a position to enforce the
release of funds (if and when we arrive at that point).
I am not pretending anything hear at all I am trying to understand the exact precise and absolute terms of your $25,000 USD listening challenge and the advantage of discussing it hear in public is that everyone can see what is going on and decide for themselves the extent to which your representations are sincere genuine and honest.
"The idea is not to compare
the ordinary wire to something else. It is to compare it to itself, once
its orientation has been changed. You know, reversed. "
As I have said from the very beginning of our many communications regarding this topic I am not sure that I could detect such a difference and in fact have never on any occassion either in this forum or elsewhere made the claim that I could detect such a difference so I am uncertain why you would ask that I put up $25,000 USD to prove that I could? It would certainly be worth experimenting to establish under a scientific protocol whether such a change might be reliably detectable but I am not sure why you would insist on a $25,000 payment and agreement with lawyers to perform this test unless you're motives are not sincere genuine and honest so please explain perhaps a better test would be to study the audible differences of your cheap Wal-Mart wire with something specifically specified designed and fabricated for use in Music Reproduction Systems.
@clearthink - As I have said from the very beginning of our many communications regarding this topic I am not sure that I could detect such a difference and in fact have never on any occassion either in this forum or elsewhere made the claim that I could detect such a difference...
@clearthink
Given what you are (now) indicating there is nothing further for you and I to communicate to one another regarding any aspect of this matter. Kindly consider the matter completely closed.
gdhal"Given what you are (now) indicating there is nothing further for you and I to communicate to one another regarding any aspect of this matter."
Please explain your fascination with wire obtained from Wal-Mart that is not designed for use in Music Reproduction Systems and why this wire in particular should be the wire you employ in your $25,000 USD listening challenge.
clearthink - Please explain your fascination with wire obtained from Wal-Mart that is not designed for use in Music Reproduction Systems and why this wire in particular should be the wire you employ in your $25,000 USD listening challenge.
@clearthink I appreciate your seeking my opinion, but I’ll opt to not respond.
gdhal"I appreciate your seeking my opinion, but I’ll opt to not respond to your question."
Well what you write hear is obviously a very much response to my questions even though you evaded it so I will ask you then given this change on your behalf are you withdrawing your offer of your previous $25,000 USD challenge or are you stating hear for the record and interest of all those concerned that the offer stands but only if the test is conducted using the Wal-Mart able of your specification?
clearthink - Well what you write hear is obviously a very much response to my questions even though you evaded it so I will ask you then given this change on your behalf are you withdrawing your offer....
gdhal"I'm withdrawing to deal with you, specifically"
Of course it is your absolute and undeniable right to exclude me from your $25,000 USD offer, which only leaves the remaining question of weather this is an offer you would consider extending to other interested parties.
clearthink - Of course it is your absolute and undeniable right to exclude me from your $25,000 USD offer, which only leaves the remaining question of weather this is an offer you would consider extending to other interested parties.
Suffice it to say that any interested party knows the appropriate communication channel in which to reach me and find out 🤑
gdhal"clearthink - Of course it is your absolute and undeniable right to exclude me from your $25,000 USD offer, which only leaves the remaining question of weather this is an offer you would consider extending to other interested parties." " Suffice it to say that any interested party knows the appropriate communication channel in which to reach me and find out 🤑"
I have now shown beyond any reasonable doubt that your $25,000 USD challenge has all the appearance of an abject fraud and that your effort to exchange details of the challenge outside of the public eye and to obtain personal information and negotiate the terms under the rigid control of your attorney's for "protection" is part of the fraud and that you have no interest at all in scientifically establishing the validity of your claims which to be clear I never did!
gdhal"clearthink - I have now shown....." "To whom?" To all everyone now sees that your repeated demands for double-blind listening tests and your $25,000 USD listening challenge is a fraud and that you don't see this is a reflection of a problem with you which you have previously acknowledged in this group and which I will not mention because I am not going to make fun of you even if your problem is a result of your own bad choices.
To all everyone now sees that your repeated demands for double-blind listening tests and your $25,000 USD listening challenge is a fraud and that you don't see this is a reflection of a problem with you which you have previously acknowledged in this group and which I will not mention because I am not going to make fun of you even if your problem is a result of your own bad choices.
So are moderators allowing monetary inducement now? If so I would like to repost my offer.
jinjuku - So are moderators allowing monetary inducement now? If so I would like to repost my offer.
@jinjuku
I wouldn’t know the answer to your question. However, if your question is legitimate, it would seem to me the correct channel of communication would be to the audiogon support email address. At least, to start your inquiry. 🤔 😀
Invariably, I am able to detect the sincerity or lack thereof of a person by virtue of their actions, or inaction, as the case may be. 😇 😎
cleeds - Perhaps that was your offer. The proposal to which I refer required a $25,000 advance payment and agreement crafted by an attorney for the supposed "protection" of the listener.
You should be a politician. You neglected to mention "escrow". That ends your argument 😎
cleeds - ...But they were met by the forum's self-proclaimed objectivists with some odd preconditions, including a $25,ooo wager and agreements prepared by attorneys for "protection.....
What's odd about asking to handle the matter privately? Maybe you expect that by posting on the forum, others will pay once you loose
🤣
@kosst_amojan. Once again, self-proclaimed expert with an untested theory, knows more than the engineers who designed the very best DACs. Nothing will convince him, and I mean nothing, because he refuses to test it. He is too intellectually dull to understand the level of his own incompetence. He is not an expert.
@kosst_amojan also will not reveal the brand and model of his MQA-certified, Roon-ready DAC with an Ethernet input. Without owning such a DAC, he cannot physically test his theory.
🐩 gdhal jbny - I am more interested to hear why those who are hearing a difference in the sound of their files via Ethernet cabling think it is happening?
A *possible* explanation is a delusional episode. Another possible reason is that the listener is merely dishonest - with themself.
>>>>Poodleman, we thank you for your almost grammatically correct explanation. One assumes the high schools on Long Island are a little bit behind the US norm. 😛
geoffkait - >>>>>>>>Poodleman, we thank you for your almost grammatically correct explanation. One assumes the high schools on Long Island are a little bit behind the US norm.
Spelling and grammar was never my forte. I leave that for my attorneys 😄
I erred in a previous post as well. I meant to enter "lose" and instead wrote "loose". At least I can admit when I make a mistake. This is a quality you - geoffkait - find it beyond yourself to embrace. 😪 To err is human. To hear a difference when ordinary speaker wire is reversed is inhuman. 👍🏻
if you can hear it even if you just think you can hear it, sure go ahead and spend the money for peace of mind. it doesn't matter whether or not there is an objective change as long as you perceive a difference.
jimf42 - it doesn’t matter whether or not there is an objective change as long as you perceive a difference.
And this is why blind testing is very fair and extremely useful in these matters. It allows the listener who is subjected to the test to "guess" or otherwise "perceive" a difference, irrespective of whether or not there truly is one. I’ve stated numerous times - in response to objections that blind testing doesn’t prove anything - that what I’ve proposed (Amy > Bob, repeat) is NOT meant to prove anything. Instead, it is meant to *demonstrate* your ability to *reliably* hear what is impossible to hear, and what YOU claim YOU can hear.
💰
EDIT:
It’s also the reason folks attempt to "save face" once they clearly think-it-over. 🤐
cleeds
- ...But they were met by the forum's self-proclaimed objectivists with
some odd preconditions, including a $25,ooo wager and agreements
prepared by attorneys for "protection.....
What's odd about asking to handle the matter privately?
Seeking private information from users of an Internet forum, requiring a $25,000 advance payment - what you call an "escrow" - and negotiating terms of a listening test through attorneys is more than just odd, and has more than the whiff of fraud. It's clear that you're trying to conceal the details of your ruse.
markalarsen @geoffkait. You are not interested in an explanation.
geoffkait Uh, what are you talking about?
markalarsen John Stronczer provided the explanation, and you prefer to ignore it.
>>>>>I didn’t ignore it. It doesn’t have anything to do with me. His explanation does not (rpt not) contradict anything I said. At least I don’t think so. Are you mistaking me for someone else?
geoffkait - ”A sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from witchcraft.”
Regarding the blind test to hear an audible difference when ordinary wire is reversed, you could bring along your witchcraft, voodoo and even perform a seance just prior to the test. It won't help you 🤣 🤑
Let’s try to focus for a second. There are many things that can go wrong with any audio test, even or perhaps especially blind tests. Failure to acknowledge that things can go wrong is an indication of the naive nature of blind test proponents. OK, so what can go wrong? Why do I say, “no test that has negative results means anything?”
Things that can go wrong
1. The system used for the test is not sufficiently resolving to distinguish differences that might be audible on a better system.
2. There are mistakes in the system that were not found even if there was a search for mistakes or errors. Saying that the test procedures are thorough doesn’t necessarily mean they really are thorough.
3. The hearing capability of the testee is not up to the task.
4. For a blind test involving many trials, say 10 or more, the odds are high that the testee doesn’t have the focus or strength to dinstinguish audible differences for periods of time without tiring. You can’t just say oh, well, that’s the way it goes.
5. System issues that go undetected due to naïveté of those involved in the test. Directionality of Fuses, directionality of cables, Polarity check of all connections, etc.
6. Using unfamiliar music for the test.
7. Using a test system unfamiliar to the testee.
8. Weather and other “external variables” that affect the sound of any system that could make hearing subtle differences in sound difficult or impossible.
What if results are positive?
If the results of a test are positive I would probably say the test was a success and the results were positive IN SPITE OF ALL THE THINGS THAT COULD HAVE GONE WRONG.
Your previous (05-04-2018 8:33am) response is well stated, genuine and therefore worthy of a meaningful response on my part.
While the points you have stated are certainly valid considerations, there is no obligation to prove anything or subject oneself to any kind of test. The blind test I’ve been advocating will always include some degree of *chance*. Everything involves chance. There is a chance you wouldn’t wake up tomorrow because "tomorrow" isn’t guaranteed to anyone.
Each person has a different "tolerance" of chance that he/she is willing to take. This is why the terms of the test must be *mutually agreed and then bound contractually* to the satisfaction of both parties. Otherwise, no test. Simple.
This is why the terms of the test must be *mutually agreed and then
bound contractually* to the satisfaction of both parties. Otherwise, no
test. Simple.
Scientists who conduct listening tests don't require $25,000 "escrows" from participants and contracts drafted by attorneys, so it's pretty obvious that you're still pursuing your rigged test, which is a ruse, a con. And it comes from a guy who repeatedly tells others they should be "honest" with themselves. Simple.
1. The system used for the test is not sufficiently resolving to distinguish differences that might be audible on a better system.
I'll do this on their system
2. There are mistakes in the system that were not found even if there was a search for mistakes or errors. Saying that the test procedures are thorough doesn’t necessarily mean they really are thorough.
I'll do this on their system
3. The hearing capability of the testee is not up to the task.
The claimant is the testee. If they can make a claim sighted and state it's just their ears then they can do this in the dark.
4. For a blind test involving many trials, say 10 or more, the odds are high that the testee doesn’t have the focus or strength to dinstinguish audible differences for periods of time without tiring. You can’t just say oh, well, that’s the way it goes.
Then the differences aren't as 'readily apparent' and 'easy to discern' or other colloquialisms that I've seen bandied about.
5. System issues that go undetected due to naïveté of those involved in the test. Directionality of Fuses, directionality of cables, Polarity check of all connections, etc.
I'll do this on their system
6. Using unfamiliar music for the test.
I'll do this on their system
7. Using a test system unfamiliar to the testee.
I'll do this on their system. In 2015 at an AQ demo I saw a people hear differences in Ethernet cabling in a really crummy room on equipment they had no familiarity with, music that most likely they weren't familiar with.
8. Weather and other “external variables” that affect the sound of any system that could make hearing subtle differences in sound difficult or impossible.
I'll try to schedule my visit with you to avoid thunderstorms.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
