Blind Power Cord Test & results

I think one of the easiest way to judge any upgrade (power cord, tube amp, or isolation device ... etc.) is to install it, listen to it, and then remove it.

I'm sure all upgrades will sound different going in, It's the ones that you can't live without, when you remove from your system, that are usually the keepers.

On the link thing ... if it wasn't for a good poke in the eye with a sharp stick from Sean awhile back, I wouldn't have learned how to do THIS. I think the advantage of using the mark up tags is you can check your link before posting.

I can't tell you the number of times I've cut and pasted a string only to get a 404 error or "no address found", because the poster flipped something in the address. It is very frustrating looking forward to gaining some new info, and coming away with nothing.

Choose your pleasure THIS or This ... http://www.audiogan.com ... try and cut and paste this link and see what happens.

If the difference is enough to be audible, why not stretch out the session and decide if it's worth investing in?.

Who cares what wins the A or B test. Does anyone listen that way?

If you do determine there are differences between a and b, the test is over. There is no "winner", the only fact is the listener can hear a difference between a and b.

At that point you are free to go and decide which you prefer, a or b.

steve

Although I subscribe to the A vs B method, I do note that there are some very special situations where inadudible problems might become anoying over time. The one that comes to mind is an ultrasonic oscillation that you cannot hear but which adversely affects your hearing, or perhaps gives you a headache.

Very special situations. 99 percent of the time I think that A vs B will reveal any difference. And I don't see ,line cords in the category of things that would be a very special situation.

A/B testing just gives me flashbacks to my last eye exam.

which looks better to you? A ... or B? A .. or B? A or B? AorB? AorB?

Argh! Make it stop! I agree with albert. I prefer long term tests.

The problem with a/b testing in a controlled group is forgetting what was heard previously. Take another example: if you a/b tested digital cameras or photo printers and you laid out all the samples in front of people they would easily be able to discern differences (provided they're not color blind, which is another factor - physiology). The greens are a little lighter, the reds are more vibrant, etc. However, if you handed out the photos one at a time, the results would be different. You may be able to recall differences with each succeding photo - but two, three or four down the line and you lose your frame of reference. Even if you observe each photo for an extended period of time, you still will forget.

Not the same with audio. You cannot listen to many power cables (or whatever) at the SAME time. You have to rely on your memory to discern differences since you are evaluating in succession. However, with the photo example above, just as professional photographers and graphic artists will be able to discern much more subtle color differences than the untrained eye, we can discern subtle sonic differences because of our listening experience or "training". But regardless of how good we discern sound (or color), relying on memeory is anything but accurate. And many times, we can only perceive the most subtle of differences only after living with a component for an extended period of time.

Nonsense, this a/b'ing IMO.