2. cables
  3. 166070-159469

What do we hear when we change the direction of a wire?

Douglas Self wrote a devastating article about audio anomalies back in 1988. With all the necessary knowledge and measuring tools, he did not detect any supposedly audible changes in the electrical signal. Self and his colleagues were sure that they had proved the absence of anomalies in audio, but over the past 30 years, audio anomalies have not disappeared anywhere, at the same time the authority of science in the field of audio has increasingly become questioned. It's hard to believe, but science still cannot clearly answer the question of what electricity is and what sound is! (see article by A.J.Essien).

For your information: to make sure that no potentially audible changes in the electrical signal occur when we apply any "audio magic" to our gear, no super equipment is needed. The smallest step-change in amplitude that can be detected by ear is about 0.3dB for a pure tone. In more realistic situations it is 0.5 to 1.0dB'". This is about a 10% change. (Harris J.D.). At medium volume, the voltage amplitude at the output of the amplifier is approximately 10 volts, which means that the smallest audible difference in sound will be noticeable when the output voltage changes to 1 volt. Such an error is impossible not to notice even using a conventional voltmeter, but Self and his colleagues performed much more accurate measurements, including ones made directly on the music signal using Baxandall subtraction technique - they found no error even at this highest level.

As a result, we are faced with an apparently unsolvable problem: those of us who do not hear the sound of wires, relying on the authority of scientists, claim that audio anomalies are BS. However, people who confidently perceive this component of sound are forced to make another, the only possible conclusion in this situation: the electrical and acoustic signals contain some additional signal(s) that are still unknown to science, and which we perceive with a certain sixth sense.

If there are no electrical changes in the signal, then there are no acoustic changes, respectively, hearing does not participate in the perception of anomalies. What other options can there be?

Regards.
anton_stepichev
Ag insider logo xs@2x
cleeds
5,978 posts
 
linnvolk
My “simple test” was not intended to be a full specification.
Thank goodness!
An obvious requirement is for there to be a controlled amount of time, the same whether switching or not, between rounds.
I don’t think that’s an obvious requirement at all. Blind listening test subjects are usually allowed as much time as they need. There are very good reasons for that, by the way, but the real point is that conducting a scientifically valid listening test is a lot trickier than it looks to the casual observer who’s never undertaken such an exercise.
audition__audio
1,511 posts
 
I dont understand the concern of those like dletch2 for the rest of us deluded souls.  I also dont understand why these folks think that the biases they suffer are endemic to the human race and also the apparent need to put all of us hobbyists in such a narrowly defined box. I dont think it is such a stretch to believe that through experience and exposure to exceptional systems that some can hear better than others. I remain confident in the buying decisions I make and the methodology I use to make these decisions. Anyway,  as is usually the case, this thread is going nowhere.

Oh I dont see any reason that a passive cable should experience any sort of directionality. But I truly dont know and I truly dont care. If the maker of a cable puts arrows on the cable I will abide.

linnvolk
90 posts
 
 Blind listening test subjects are usually allowed as much time as they need.
@cleeds, the listener can take all the time desired during the round.  Requiring the same time between rounds is to make sure that the same time elapses between rounds whether switching cable directions or not.  A counterexample is a recent(?) test that Rick Beato either performed or mentioned in which the respondents were to attempt to tell the difference between a "cd" quality and a "high-resolution" quality recording of the same music.  Some of the respondents were clever enough to intentionally game the system by realizing that the larger files took longer to load.  Even if not intentionally "cheating," the differing load times lent an unwanted bias to the test.  (I think you probably understand all this and perhaps did not read my post carefully.)

I concede that there are some details that would need to be attended to, but still maintain that a fairly simple test along the lines I described would be enlightening and perhaps conclusive.  To reject the hypothesis that one cannot hear directionality, multiple persons who make the claim to be able to hear would have to be tested and found not to be able to make the right call a statistically significant amount of the time.  However, if we can find one person who can consistently tell the difference, then I would say that that "proves" that some can hear the difference.  (And I doubt that I would be one of those.)

dletch2
455 posts
 
I also don't understand why these folks think that the biases they suffer are endemic to the human race



Because they are. You may not understand this, but that does not make it any less true. Application specific knowledge reduces bias. The people who get the most abuse on these forums are those most immune to bias. This is not conjecture, but has been shown repeatedly in subjective testing fields.


I have never avoiding blind testing, and because of that, I know, for fact, that audiophiles, just like everyone else are susceptible to bias, and expensive systems and listening experience appears do not inoculate a person from bias, no more than a sugar solution inoculates against a virus. Lifelong audiophiles with expensive systems are just as susceptible as anyone, and if they have convinced themselves of their infallibility, then they are even worse. I believe @Mijosytn in another thread pointed out that there is the ability, if desired, to train yourself to be better to pick up changes, but this is beyond the capabilities of most audiophiles as they cannot generate the controlled changes necessary, and as obvious in this thread, are unwilling to remove their eyes from the equation.



millercarbon's avatar
millercarbon
12,531 posts
 
I wonder, in your scientific and philosophical inquiries, have you ever studied the phenomenon of people incapable of noticing their own circular reasoning?
More to discover