Are audiophiles still out of their minds?

fortunately we each get to listen to cables and other products and buy the ones we want to buy...

mitch2
1,257 posts
06-12-2016 12:42pm
Geoffkait: "I figured it wouldn’t be too long before blind testing raised its ugly head.
"ugly head?"

to which mitch2 replied,

"Geeze Geoff, you can be more creative than pulling that page from your well-worn playbook.

What I don’t understand is how you and others can support the miraculous effects of cables, fuses, wire direction and other minutia, by saying the differences can obviously be heard, but then discount a method that provides listeners the opportunity to judge what sounds best based on the differences they hear, in the absence of other sensory and social influences. When challenged, many say the DBT method is not perfect but then neither is dropping some expensive item, or the "latest and greatest" version of something, into your system and heralding the positive effects without considering cognitive bias, golden halo effects, social reality and other psychological phenomena that could have a larger effect on influencing listeners than the potential drawbacks to DBT."

Please Re-read what I wrote and try not to put words in my mouth. I didn’t discount blind tests. I actually have no problem with blind tests or any other type of tests. But what I’m saying is that naysayers don’t actually DO any blind tests themselves nor do they have any evidence that anyone else has actually done ANY blind tests for cables. Furthermore a blind test or any test is not conclusive of anythung. It’s just a data point. There are so many examples of bad tests, really bad and unscientific tests, that it’s a bit difficult to take seriously anyone who claims that (someone else’s) test proves this or that. And one step further, if the results of a particular test are negative, if differences between cables or whatever are not observed, the results are practically meaningless without context to other tests and can be throw out depending on results of (any) other tests. You know, just like naysayers will claim that the placebo effect or expectation bias MUST be the cause of positive results. ;-)

GK

there seems to be a lot of concern that wealthy audiophiles not be duped...

Al,

I hope you take no disrespect from this but when I read your posts (like the two below), I feel I am reading my own thoughts but expressed in a more refined manner. Your logic is typically spot-on, sequentially developed and cogent, yet complete. (I would speculate you are an engineer or have played one in a former life; but that is just a guess. I suppose a litigator could be an option as well.)

I see very little room for a thoughtful person to argue any of your observations in the second post.  The only minor quibble I have would be the use of the term "over-priced" in paragraphs (4) and (5) which has the potential to leave a negative connotation based on a subjective measure (namely value). Certainly some wires have different "price-to-performance ratios," but given you have done such a intelligent job of compiling a list of objective observations void of subjective noise (i.e., crafted in a manner that disavows contention), I might have said it differently. None-the-less, very well done.

So when the content of your second post is juxtaposed with the understanding that the definition of "value" is entirely personal, in my opinion it becomes quite clear that people using purchase decisions (be they of cables or otherwise) as a weapons do so for reasons completely unrelated to audio.

almarg6,448 posts06-12-2016 10:13am

Geoffkait 6-11-2016 6:04 pm EDT
Lots of notable people don’t believe in things like high end cables, or say wire directionality or aftermarket fuses or fuse directionality and other things that have been around like forever. But that in itself doesn’t mean they’re not true. That’s what we in the biz refer to as an Appeal to Authority, which as you probably know is a logical fallacy.

While there are those who would consider an Appeal to Authority to be a logical fallacy, as I see it such an appeal is not at all illogical. Rather, it is simply less than conclusive, to SOME degree. The degree to which it is less than conclusive, and the persuasiveness of the appeal, comes down to a matter of judgment, taking into account the credibility and relevant background of the particular authority, the persuasiveness of conflicting evidence that may be available, the nature of the particular subject, and perhaps other factors. And as always, the judgments of different individuals will frequently differ.

Regards,
-- Al

almarg6,448 posts03-15-2016 2:30pmCan everyone agree on most or all of the following, and then perhaps this less than constructive discussion can be concluded:

1)Wires sound different, to a greater or lesser degree depending not only on the wire but on the technical characteristics of what they are connecting, their lengths, the AC voltage and noise characteristics at the particular location in the case of power cords (at least), the system, the room, the recording, and the listener.

2)For many reasons, including synergy with the aforementioned variables, the correlation between cable price and cable performance is significantly less than 1.0 (i.e., significantly less than perfect).

3)Based in part on a substantial body of anecdotal evidence that has accumulated over the years, the correlation between cable price and cable performance is significantly greater than 0.0 (i.e., significantly greater than none).

4)It seems evident that some cables are overpriced, one reason among several being that their prices are determined in part based on what the market will bear. And it seems evident that SOME segment of the market assumes a higher degree of correlation between cable price and cable performance than is actually the case, and that segment of the market will therefore pay higher prices to achieve results that may (with sufficient experimentation) be achievable at lower prices in their particular cases.

5)Additional reasons that cables may in many cases be overpriced relative to the benefit they are likely to provide (I’m quoting from myself in the following thread from a couple of years ago; and pardon the redundancy with some of the points mentioned above): 

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/small-cable-companies-making-preposterous-claims

(a)As seems to be generally agreed by most audiophiles, cable performance is highly system dependent.

(b)From a technical standpoint, it can be expected that cable performance will vary significantly depending on the technical characteristics of the components that are being connected, such as impedances. Even to the point of a comparison between two cables yielding exactly opposite results depending on what they are connecting. In past threads, such as this one, I have cited examples of situations in which exactly that can be expected to occur. [See especially both of the paragraphs in my post in that thread dated 12-15-2012 which begin with "one interesting example"].

(c)It seems to be generally agreed by most audiophiles that cable performance cannot be either fully explained or fully predicted based on generally recognized science. It follows from that, however, that the cable designers have no way to accurately predict the point of demarcation between optimization of a given cable parameter or design characteristic and what may be overkill of that parameter or design characteristic, which will accomplish nothing in most or all applications. Therefore it can be expected that what is likely to be a significant driver of the cost of many very expensive cables is overkill of some or all of their design parameters and characteristics, which will accomplish nothing in most or all applications.

6)It can be expected that if SOME audiophiles whose cable experience has focused disproportionately on the higher part of the price spectrum were to give equal opportunity to a variety of cables at lower price points, and experiment with such cables as extensively as they do with higher priced cables, there is a significant chance that they may be able to achieve performance comparable to what they have achieved at those higher price points at significantly lower price points. A substantial body of anecdotal evidence that has been reported here and elsewhere supports that conclusion, for example the threads about vintage Western Electric wires.

7)It can be expected that if SOME audiophiles whose cable experience has focused disproportionately or entirely on the lower part of the price spectrum were to focus on the higher part of the price spectrum they might in some cases, depending in part on their equipment, be surprised at how good the results are. A substantial body of anecdotal evidence that has been reported here and elsewhere supports that conclusion 

8)Some audiophiles care more than others about achieving the last 5 or 10 or 20% of the performance their components are capable of. Some are satisfied with 80% and just want to listen to music. Both approaches are equally valid.

9)Assertions that wire is just wire are erroneous, and that belief should not be promulgated.

10)Assertions that more expensive necessarily = better are also erroneous, and that belief should not be promulgated, by implication or otherwise.

11)Just as not all audible differences are measurable, not all measurable differences are audible. I say that in connection with measurable differences that are presented in some marketing literature.

12)An assertion that spending more on cables rather than less increases the **probability** of achieving optimal results is arguably correct, but pronouncements to that effect are not gospel. And opinions to the contrary, if presented in a respectful manner, can and should be discussed in a respectful manner.

Regards,
-- Al