2. cables
  3. 146425-122613

The Science of Cables

It seems to me that there is too little scientific, objective evidence for why cables sound the way they do. When I see discussions on cables, physical attributes are discussed; things like shielding, gauge, material, geometry, etc. and rarely are things like resistance, impedance, inductance, capacitance, etc. Why is this? Why aren’t cables discussed in terms of physical measurements very often?

Seems to me like that would increase the customer base. I know several “objectivist” that won’t accept any of your claims unless you have measurements and blind tests. If there were measurements that correlated to what you hear, I think more people would be interested in cables. 

I know cables are often system dependent but there are still many generalizations that can be made.
128x128mkgus
douglas_schroeder
3,281 posts
 
glupson, I'm not making any promotion of burn in. So, you can lay aside that argument against trying Schroeder Method ICs. Double ICs need no burn in to sound superior to single IC. I advise that you make the comparison to single IC as soon as you have built the double. It will take zero time on the system to sound superior.  :) 

You may find my Audiophile Law: Thou Shalt Not Overemphasize Burn In at dagogo.com to be interesting. You will see why I don't wait around for change; I make it happen.   :) 

I presume that plenty of ardent audiophiles would disagree with me on that topic. However, I have no interest in debating my perspective on it. 
glupson
7,842 posts
 
douglas_schroeder,

I have no argument against Schroeder method. I mentioned "burn-in" as it is frequently mentioned when talking about cables.

I am aware that this thread has become "Schroeder method"-focused despite its title being about the science of cables, not only about Schroeder method cables. Do not forget, there is a thread about Schroeder method only somewhere on Audiogon, too.

The title of this thread is The Science Of Cables. It is quite long to read it all again, but most of the recent posts invite trials/experimentation rather than discuss theoretical basis of cables. Not that science cannot not include trials/experimentation, but there is not much theory being presented here lately.
danvignau's avatar
danvignau
935 posts
 
Science is not used to explain cables for the same reason it is not used to explain creationism. 
danvignau's avatar
danvignau
935 posts
 
Faith vs science!
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 
danvignau188 posts03-08-2019 5:30amFaith vs science!

>>>>>>Did your dog tell you that? 
More to discover