2. cables
  3. 158348-11297

A challenge to the "measurement" camp

I’ve watched some of his video and I actually agree on some of what he said,
but he seems too confident on his insistence on measurement. For those
who expound on the merits of blind test and measurement, why not turn
the table upside down?

Why not do a blind test of measurement? That is I will supply all the measurement
you want, can you tell me which is a better product?

For example, if I have a set of cable, and a set of measurement for each
individual cable, can you tell me which is the best cable based on measurement
alone? I will supply all the measurement you want.
After all, that is what you’re after right? Objective result and not subjective
listening test.

Fast forward to 8:15 mark where he keeps ranting about listening test
without measurement.  
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=katmUM-Xelw

By the way, is he getting paid by Belden?  Because he keeps talking about it
and how well it measures.  I've had some BlueJean cables and they can easily
bettered by some decent cables.  
andy2
roberttdid
534 posts
 
@drbarney1 , you should question most of the marketing w.r.t. cables. Most of it is made up with no evidence that what they claim is what is causing any audible difference. This is not a "measurements" thing. If what they claimed was true, they would show it with good old fashion listening tests, heck, they would at least "try" to quantify what they claim, but they don't. Why? ....
mahgister's avatar
mahgister
13,194 posts
 
You accuse me of conspiracy like if it was an insult without even reading my point about statistics.... And you are the one arguing about the fact that people had no argument .... Very funny....

It is easy instead of understanding someone complex viewpoint to put him on your chess board with black and white colors....Childish games.... Reality exceed what we think about it....

The map and the reality are totally different.....
speedbump6
760 posts
 
Pretty much all recorded audio and video of analog or digital types is “sampled”. It’s bits of information, but easiest to show with videos, we all know 60 frames per second for film, and we believe we see motion as we do in real life. It boils down to how much resolution does there need to be before we can no longer see or hear a discernable difference, this is of course simplifying it, but makes the point. This is one place I can agree with Robert, current hi rez can contain more information than Anolog. Vinyl is “ bits” of information, cut into the vinyl. High resolution compared to say mp3 for sure. Cassette and reel to reel is also bits of info. It’s possible maybe for someone to feel analog sounds better, or more musical to them, because hi res might have more detail, assuming they’re able to hear it, and therefore maybe doesn’t seem as sweet or smooth. That has been suggested before. 
mahgister's avatar
mahgister
13,194 posts
 
I use digital and i can listen to the true potential of digital with my controlled embeddings of the audio system....

But many digital audio system sound awful....I can understand others viewpoint also....

The key to Hi-Fi is the embeddings not the digital/vinyl choices....And certainly not cables differences even if they are real, and they are indeed....


andy2 OP
1,555 posts
 
Skin effect increases the resistance of a typical speaker by about 0.o1 Ohms at 20 kHz, something that can be calculated from any E&M textbook used in master's degree level courses. In series with speakers with DC resistance of 4 Ohms the roll-off is less than 0.01 db at 20 kHz. Cable designers should know this and if they do, they can't be bothered to admit litz construction of individual strands "solves" a problem that does not exist.
On the other hands, you can't disprove that either.  That is you can't disprove that our hearing can detect the difference due to skin affect.  


More to discover