2. cables
  3. 128927-305

Most Important, Unloved Cable...

Ethernet. I used to say the power cord was the most unloved, but important cable. Now, I update that assessment to the Ethernet cable. Review work forthcoming. 

I can't wait to invite my newer friend who is an engineer who was involved with the construction of Fermilab, the National Accelerator Lab, to hear this! Previously he was an overt mocker; no longer. He decided to try comparing cables and had his mind changed. That's not uncommon, as many of you former skeptics know. :)

I had my biggest doubts about the Ethernet cable. But, I was wrong - SO wrong! I'm so happy I made the decision years ago that I would try things rather than simply flip a coin mentally and decide without experience. It has made all the difference in quality of systems and my enjoyment of them. Reminder; I settled the matter of efficacy of cables years before becoming a reviewer and with my own money, so my enthusiasm for them does not spring from reviewing. Reviewing has allowed me to more fully explore their potential.  

I find fascinating the cognitive dissonance that exists between the skeptical mind in regard to cables and the real world results which can be obtained with them. I'm still shaking my head at this result... profoundly unexpected results way beyond expectation. Anyone who would need an ABX for this should exit the hobby and take up gun shooting, because your hearing would be for crap.  
douglas_schroeder
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 

almarg
Shadorne, I partially agree and partially disagree with your latest post above. I agree that sensitivity to ethernet cable differences is a manifestation of less than ideal behavior by the components that are involved. And in at least some cases might be an indication that the designer’s expertise is less than ideal. However arguably no design is perfect, and all designs represents the net result of countless tradeoffs, including practical ones such as cost. (And by that I am not referring just to production costs, but to development costs, time constraints on the development process, etc). So components having less sensitivity to differences in that cable may very well have any number of countless other downsides that are conceivable, in comparison with competitive products that are more sensitive to those differences.

Let’s see, no design is perfect. All designs represent the net result of countless tradeoffs. Including practical ones like cost. Costs involved with production. Development costs. Time constraints on the development process. Some components may have countless other downsides conceivably compared to other products. Whoa! Hey! You forgot one thing, Al. The sky is blue.

😀

almarg's avatar
almarg
9,670 posts
 
Yes, I did forget that one, Geoff. Thanks for pointing that out. But sometimes common sense and technically supportable middle-ground positions seem to get overlooked in disputes between those at opposite extremes of the belief spectrum.

Regards,
-- Al

geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 
Yes, I did forget that one, Geoff. Thanks for pointing that out. But sometimes common sense and technically supportable middle-ground positions seem to get overlooked in disputes between those at opposite extremes of the belief spectrum.

Al, no they don’t get overlooked. Those common things you listed, the ones that are patently true, don’t mean anything. It’s an interesting logical fallacy, though, using obvious truths to try to make it seem like your argument must be true. It's really the old Appeal to Reason logical fallacy in different clothes. My hat’s off to you. Old lawyer trick? 😬 You could employ the same tactics to try to prove almost anything in this hobby. Because such and such is true there must be no audible differences between fuses. Or, because such and such is true there must be audible differences between fuses. They can’t both be true. Let’s call it the logical fallacy of the Appeal to Occam’s razor. 😬 I actually don’t think this is an argument between two extremes. It’s just a typical audiophile argument, subjectivists vs objectivists, that’s all. Same old, same old.
cleeds
6,275 posts
 
jinjuku
I believe the method is scientifically valid and I haven’t seen any material counterpoint to it.
At least three contributors in this thread have explained how your test fails to meet scientific protocol. So either you're not paying attention, or you're just here to argue. 
jinjuku's avatar
jinjuku
226 posts
 
At least three contributors in this thread have explained how your test fails to meet scientific protocol. So either you’re not paying attention, or you’re just here to argue.

Post numbers please.

Let’s say you maintain you can jump 20 feet straight up. If I show up with a tape measure and a bar and offer $2K for you to jump, what is non-scientific about it?

Their sighted evaluation certainly holds no water. So not sure why you would give the credence over a well controlled evaluation rig. 



More to discover