Who says cables don't make a difference?


Funny, after all these years, people still say things like "you wasted all that money on cables". 
There are still those who believe cables don't make a difference.
I once did marketing for a cable line I consider to be about the best-Stealth Audio Cables. 
One CES, I walked the rooms with the designer/owner, Serguei Timachev. He carried a pair of his then new Indra interconnects. Going from room to room he asked the room runners to replace their source to preamp IC with the Indra. There was not one that was not completely flabbergasted and said that the Indras blew away what they were using. That was the skyrocketing of Indra and Stealth. The Indra became one of the best reviewed cables ever.
Serguei now makes the Sakra-an IC that blows away the Indra!
I don't understand why some still do not value cables as much as I.
mglik
You just raised pedantic to a whole new level. I have done fully controlled double blind testing in research lab environments, and more simplistic single blind testing too many times to count .... which is one times more blind than I expect most people commenting on this thread have ever done.

It's hard to put bias into a test process that involves nothing more than swapping cables. Great thing about that is you rarely even need to level balance, and not level balancing would increase the detection threshold not reduce it.

I am not a "casual observer".


For example, you’ve made it clear that you don’t think the differences between competent cables is audible. You’ve poisoned the well by conveying that to a test subject; you’ve given him a reason ("power of suggestion") to find no difference.


This is wishful thinking. Remember what is being tested. What is being tested is that the person making the claim of (usually) a readily apparent audible difference is able to actually perceive in a blind situation the difference. No more. No less. Your "poisoning" actually does not fit typical psychological reactions. Normally when a persons beliefs are challenged, they will work extra hard to prove those beliefs, not fold like a wet blanket.



You can blindtest  some little change....You cannot blindtest total transformation because it is plain for anybody to see(hear)...It is no more  useful for anybody ....

Blindtest is there to validate (marketting practice) or invalidate (debunkers) some small variation like with a cable...

No one blindtest the acoustic of the same room before treatment and after it.,..

No one blindtest the electrical grid of a house before or after it is controlled...

No one blindtest the audio system before and after his many resonant parts are under controls, even if it is easier to perform than for the 2 others embeddings...

My point is many changes are so evident than blindtesting them has no interest, except for those who sell some product and those who debunk some product...






Cleeds, it wouldn’t matter what you say, he’s done it better. He’s obviously the only true expert. He’s another kenjit. In his world at least, his word is final. For the rest of us though, we could actually have a meaningful convo if he would stay away from a subject he’s made very clear about his bais towards and let stop trying to destroy ever thread on the subject as he has blatantly tried to do. No wonder an older account t he had was banned. Brings nothing of value to the discussion, only goal is to tear down others thoughts. 
I am sorry I just ran over the speedbump, but the topic of this thread is, "Who says cables don’t make a difference?"

After 9 pages, that still seems to be lost on you. Who says? I say (and others), but most don’t have the experience and hence the confidence to back that statement up, and qualify it as required.

Cleeds was just attempting to invent a psychological theory (where the opposite is usually true), as opposed to considering that perhaps, just perhaps, expectation bias is a bigger issue than most want to believe.


Who says cables don't make a difference? ..... is this not a call out to challenge the notion that cables do make a difference.  Otherwise just make a post called, "Love fest for cable differences", and be honest.
roberttdid
You just raised pedantic to a whole new level.
If you think the presentation of facts is pedantry, then you’re confused. Here’s an example of pedantry:
roberttdid
Let me type this slowly so that it is totally clear. I have run many blind tests ...
Do you see the difference?
It’s hard to put bias into a test process that involves nothing more than swapping cables ...
Actually, it’s very easy to introduce bias into a test itself. There are mountains of information on this and I’m surprised that you don’t understand that. (I suspect that you do understand the nature of biased testing, and that you just prefer to not have to address it.)
Remember what is being tested. What is being tested is that the person making the claim of (usually) a readily apparent audible difference is able to actually perceive in a blind situation the difference.
Again, you are confused. A proper double-blind listening test does not test the listener, it tests the device under test (DUT). You cannot scientifically test for two things at the same time.

If you want to test a listener, engage an audiologist. That’s what they do.

If you want to make your blind cable test even more meaningful, you’ll want subjects that think cables make a difference as well as those who don’t think cables make a difference. And if you’re really ambitious, you’ll also include some listeners who don’t care - or have no opinion - one way or the other. The last blind test that I participated in years ago did just that, and it made the results even more interesting.

@roberttdid if you are really serious about conducting some blind tests, please provide us with some details about your plan.