The Science of Cables

"Engineers developed wiring systems with low-reactance cable for use in the Apollo lunar missions and other mission-critical NASA projects, such as the International Space Station."

How much were they?

prof, yes, I was able to discern power cables as well. I will not pretend I have super hearing. The cables were not easy at all to discern at matched level. They seemed much closer in sound characteristics when ABX and matched level than when in normal use. But, the ABX was testing one leg of cabling, not the entire set. I was successful at identifying power cords with high percentage of accuracy, whereas amplifiers I could not. Frank Van Alstine and I had a wonderful conversation about that only after the review, so as to not introduce any bias. That's when I learned that at AVA the amps were the only parts of the system they could not ABX well, i.e. get significantly greater than 50% identification, either. Our results, though unknown to us at the time of the review, were parallel. 

That puts an exclamation point on the results, I'd say! 

Will that change many skeptics' minds? Probably not. Some people have incredible faith in their doubt.  :(

BTW, I did NOT invite NASA to my testing.  ;) 

Now to go listen to this new preamp under review; it's INCREDIBLE! It blows the doors off all the others! The sound is AMAZING. It is 50% BETTER than anything out there... 

But not as good as Schroeder Method.  LOL  ;)

Douglas,


Congrats.  Never heard of anyone passing a blind test for AC cables.  Only failures.

But, the ABX was testing one leg of cabling, not the entire set.

I'm not quite grokking that.  Could you be a bit more detailed about how you blind/ABX-tested the AC cables?  I would love to see results between a regular, competently built AC cable and whatever high end cable you would have chosen.

I blind tested some Shunyata cables against a $15 off-the-shelf cable and could not detect differences in blind tests.   I wouldn't think this would, or should, change anyone's mind about cables any more than your results would.

However, if after looking over your methodology, it looks sound, I would take your results as a data point in favor of some cables being audibly different.   But, just as no  one should take my blind tests as definitive, I wouldn't take yours - either of us could have made some unknown error.  Which is why repeatability of the same results by other parties is a feature in science.

Still, for us measly audiophiles, we do our best and make our own conclusions from our experience.


And the results of your blind tests would also support the usefulness of blind testing.  Lots of blind-test nay-sayers claim blind tests aren't, or can't be, conducted in a way to detect differences.  So they think blind testing itself somehow erases the ability to hear real differences.  Which is untrue as lots of blind test show positive results for identification.  Some of mine were positive too.