2. cables
  3. 146725-20253

How I would measure cables

Hi everyone,
There’s been a lot of talk about "science" and cables. To me it sounds a lot like free energy, and cold fusion scams. With few exceptions, they invoke a lot of physics, without ever tying it back down to actual results. Fancy words, and lots of them.
In the fusion/energy camps this has become so common that they use a very simple method to find fraud. Like the discovery of the Enron scam, we have learned to compare input to output. Enron was first discovered to be a fraud by simply looking at the income and comparing it to claimed money generated. And oh how they howled that we just didn’t understand the business model.

So, with perpetual motion, fusion, dark matter conversion generators, and what have you, they have a simple test. Compare energy in versus energy out over time. The funny thing is, if any of these things actually worked, you’d think they’d make money by selling energy, but they don’t, they make money by getting you to invest or buy their equipment.

Anyway, point is, we live at a time where 96kHz/32 bit AD converters are common place, and commonly used in signal testing and analysis. If _ANY_ cable actually was worth high prices it would be super simple to test the output. For instance, record the signal at the speaker terminals for an entire performance you believe shows how good cable A vs. cable B is. Then go in and locate the difference. Perhaps it is frequency, perhaps timing, perhaps amplitude. It’s a lot of data for the 1970s, but all this would fit on anyone’s laptop now and be relatively easy to analyze.

I don’t have the time or energy to do this, anymore than I have the time to measure the power of the latest perpetual motion gizmo, however, this is affordable and practical for most manufacturers to accomplish. That none have done this, except a little done by Analysis Plus (with severe constraints) is why I will always remain somewhat with the skeptics and the "that’s way too expensive for a cable" camp.

So my point is, if you make cables you think do something cool, and worthwhile, I encourage you to undertake this type of basic research, maybe even define how testing should be done so others can follow and we can compare. For the rest of the world, I strongly encourage skepticism and to ask yourself repeatedly if what you are hearing really is worth the cost, or whether the same amount of money is better spent on a vacation.

If you want things which are clearly better than cables, room acoustic treatments by far are much easier to hear, prove they work, and end up with reliably great results.

Best,

E
erik_squires
erik_squires OP
16,225 posts
 
Here’s another example of someone arguing for objective testing of things such as cables, but refusing to do the work themselves - even though they insist it would be "super simple" to do it. After all, it’s just "basic research." Why do they reserve the chore for those who are already happy with the choices they’ve made?

Oddly, Erik titled this thread, "How I would measure cables." But he won’t.



Simple for a manufacturer to do, and since it is their product, the onus is on them, not me, the consumer, to do their testing for them.


Funny that amplifier, speaker, room acoustic and DAC makers have little problems measuring their products. Why should the consumer be responsible for proving their products work as advertised?


PS audio even did credible testing and demonstrations for their power plants.


Now, if some one wants to start a gofundme for this project, I’d be happy to, because then I’d be a professional doing this.


It's simple. If you are selling free energy, you pay for the testing.

Best,
E
erik_squires OP
16,225 posts
 
BTW, my point to this thread is that a lot of marketing and BS science is thrown out to justify very expensive cables. The claim is made that we can't measure cables based on basic, old school, steady state measurements.


OK, fine, but we are decades from the invention of the oscilloscope, frequency generator and volt meter. It's time to refresh our expectations of how we could in fact measure something which could be more complex.


Where are they? 

No one should be upset that _I_ won't measure cables. You should be upset cable manufacturers and reviewers won't measure them or try to come up with a reasonable theory as to what is happening and how they work.
Ag insider logo xs@2x
cleeds
5,968 posts
 
erik_squires

... since it is their product, the onus is on them, not me, the consumer, to do their testing for them.
No, you're asking others to do the tests you desire, but "don’t have the time or energy to do" yourself, even though you think those tests would be "super simple" to conduct. Sorry, but no one has any burden to conduct testing to your satisfaction.
... You should be upset cable manufacturers and reviewers won't measure them ...
We should be upset because you tell us to be upset? That's absurd.
erik_squires OP
16,225 posts
 
If you make claims about speaker cables, prove it. That's what I'm asking. I'm also saying that the reasons we can't is that we are hearing things to subtle to be measured.
I call BS.
Ag insider logo xs@2x
cleeds
5,968 posts
 
erik_squires
If you make claims about speaker cables, prove it.
Whatever claims I have made about speaker cables have been proven to my satisfaction. You are free to do the same. Or, good luck getting others to do your work for you.
I'm also saying that the reasons we can't is that we are hearing things to subtle to be measured. 
But you state in your OP that it would be "super easy"  to do these tests. So which is it? Super easy? Or too subtle to measure?
More to discover