Why do intelligent people deny audio differences?

>>So the argument that there are no differences is FALSE.<<

It has not been argued that there are NO differences.

I don't think anyone would argue that 24 gauge cable would sound the same as 12 gauge cable, for example.

There may also be cases of cables with capacitance so high that it may cause an audible difference. Why anyone would want such a cable is another question.

It has been argued that it has not been PROVEN that there are AUDIBLE differences between some of the cables that audiophiles claim sound different.

That's all.

That's enough to rile up feathers.

What you have is a lot of CONTRADICTORY evidence. You have anecdotal testimony that some cables sound different, but no one has ever published a double blind study supporting it. To date, every double-blind study that has been done has turned up the opposite -- subjects cannot reliably tell the difference. When this is posted, there is always conjecture about the system used, the expertise of the subjects, etc. But, apparently, no one can find the system and subjects who can pass these tests -- so guess what -- it remains unproven.

On the other hand, you have a buch of unbelievable testimonials, cable advertising that misleading, tests that show people can imagine differences that are not there, etc. Which all points up why it will take double-blind studies to prove there are audible differences.

And, it has been argued that this is what it will take to convince skeptics.

Whether it is a worthwhile enterprise to try to convince skeptics rather than to just enjoy and embrace one's experience is up to others to decide.

I have suggested it, but no takers.

I have suggested that it is probably not a worthwhile endeavor and that in absence of this need to "win" or "convince" or to "prove" -- no proof is necessary. Only experience and beliefs need be shared.

Predictably, this does not satisfy.

Many people come here to be considered "experts."

>>there are definititely at least SOME measurable differences in some cables(resistance, capacitance, inductance, dielectric, shielding) which HAVE been PROVEN to have effects on the sound of cables.<<

It would be nice if such a study were available, but there is no such study.

If there were, it would show that cables are not mysterious at all, but are very predictable, which would take all of the fun out of the cable phenomenon.

You would think some well-heeled cable believer would fund such a study, provide the system needed, the subjects that can pass the ABX tests, and put an end to the debate.

But, no one has.

So, there's no proof.

Just a number of people who feel insulted because anecdotal testimony may be interesting, but it is not acceptable as proof.

Personally, I think my suggestion would lead to more polite conversation.

Oh well......

I'm willing to be a participant.

But really, most "cable believers" think that testing to prove something that is easily seen to be self-evident to be a waste of time.

We don't need a test to prove that the sun comes up in the morning. Only the disbelievers need the test.

However, it someone puts something together, and can get me to the location, I'll put my money where my mouth is.
I've done this before, and I have no worries about doing it again.

Twl...Of course the sun comes up each morning, and the rooster thinks he makes it happen.

Are you sure a spectrun analyzer measures everything from source to brain? Or, maybe the human brain is inferior to a spectrum analyzer.

>>But really, most "cable believers" think that testing to prove something that is easily seen to be self-evident to be a waste of time.<<

Exactly. People naturally want to think they can trust their perceptions.
This is why researchers report that people who've just heard large dfferences between cables get rip roaring angry when the blindfolds go on and the differences disappear. People don't want to think they can be influenced to hear things by peer group pressure, the appearance of a cable, things they heard on the internet, the need to be able to hear differences between any two things because it seems like any two things should sound different, although many times they do not, the need to perceive oneself as having golden ears, or the mind simply creates differences subconsciously because it is confronted with two different looking cables, etc. etc. etc.

But, it stands to reason that people who don't think they are susceptible to such influences are arguably the most likely to be susceptible.

That's why scientists guard against it by performing double-blind tests.

But -- hey -- most of us are just audio nuts, we're not scientists.

Bottom line: I end my particpation in this thread with the same thought with which I started. People believe what they believe. This thread, to me, has born that out. There are lots of approaches to audio that work and as long as we are all happy with our systems, who is to judge?

It was interesting chatting with you all.

Thanks, and happy listening.

Larsky -- I hope you and your brother work things out.

Life's too short to fight with family over audio!