James Randi vs. Anjou Pear - once and for all

Shardone:
"Then why do you think John Atkinson and Dave Clark do not take up the challenge?

If it is "easy to distinguish" then surely the time/effort would be worth a million bucks?"

If the challenge to be able distinguish one from the other in a listening test I think it would be VERY easy indeed! But the challenge is to prove that Pear Anjou "perform better" than the equivalent Monster which is the catch. Since we are talking about listening here, isn't "better" in the ear of the beholder?

BTW, the Pear Anjou cable already does "perform better" in its ultra low inductance measurements. On that count alone they ARE better. But Randi seems to to think properties such as capacitance and inductance matter only to nut cases (read the writeup in his website).

Dave,

No I have not tried solid core so my experience is limited to ordinary stranded cables of several types (including extension cord cable, lamp cord, monster etc.) and none have made a wit of differece to my tin ears except that I felt much better about using thicker (higher AWG) cables for long runs (as per JBL table). I have not tried difficult load speakers or amps with high output impedance - so I have been in the situation of using gear that is likely to be only very modestly affected by a change in impedance - slight enough that it is inaudible to my tin ears.

Shadorne,

I think you are selling your ears short. Without getting in to exotic expensive cables, just try a set of some of the least expensive solid core cables in your system. I can't say that you will surely like them better, but I think you will easily hear a difference.

Years ago I used to keep a pair of original Monster speaker cable around along with the entry level Audioquest solid core wire. I would do comparisons for people who were sure that they couldn't tell the difference between any cables. To simplify the comparison I would take a single speaker and play about one minute on one cable and then switch to the other. The difference was so obvious that many of the listeners would start giggling.

The interesting thing was that some of these listeners were not audiophiles and had no idea what a Monster Cable or an AQ cable was. They had no "horse" in the race. For these people the listening comparison was tantamount to a blind listening test, just minus the stress that would normally accompany such a test for an audiophile who is concened about the outcome.

Dave,

You may be correct. I see that Monster now sells solid core interconnects and they clearly state on their website.

Ordinary cables can actually limit sound quality restricting dynamic range and frequency response. The result? You don't hear your music, dialogue and effects the way they were meant to be heard. Instead, soundstage is compressed, imaging smeared and vocals - both spoken and sung - difficult to understand.

and on the solid core they claim

You'll hear improved vocal reproduction, deeper, tighter bass, superior soundstage and excellent imaging...extraordinary improvements that properly designed cables can make in your sound system.

After reading this and your testimonial Dave, how can one not be totally convinced that claiming the Million bucks should be an absolute breeze.

If an audio reviewer says they cannot be bothered to discern "extraordinary improvements" in order to claim a million bucks then something is suspiciously wrong with the statements being issued by the audio cable industry and reviewers themselves!

=> Nobody seems willing to back up these claims. Are the claims actually extreme hyperbole?

Perhaps my understanding of "extraordinary" is different from others. As far as I am concerned, "extraordinary" should be clearly audible...no ifs, ands or buts about it.

Cool site,I booked it next to my Dead site so I dont have to get spread out so thin,adieu,Bob