@djones,
Indeed, these are subjective realities. Perhaps, thus guy smoke marijuana and every cable, including the tested one, sounds wonderful for him or he was encouraged by the seller or whatever.
An empirical evidence based on theory is reliable but unlikely that may occur in these threads.
Empirical evidence can also be anecdotal evidence and persons postulating on how much difference a cable makes in the sound coming from their speakers is empirical and anecdotal evidence.@audio2design gave an excellent overview, according to which these are non-empirical evidences, as an empirical evidence reflects objective reality. @audio2design has in fact justified that the most of the arguments here are based on non-empirical, i.e., anecdotic evidences. And empirical evidences are somehow related with a theory. For instance, by observing the temperature (an empirical evidence) we rely on the theory based on which thermomiters were designed. Even anecdotic evidences here rely on theory. E.g., when one judges about sonic properties of a DAC, he relies on the theory on which this dac was built (e.g. Fourier transformation used in sampling/unsampling process or whatever theoretical assumption supporting the architecture of that unit).
From this evidence we build hypotheses is the difference because of the cable or some other factor? Now we can begin to form experiments to understand why this person hears differences between cables or we can just take their word for it only one of these will further our knowledge of cables and human perception and it isn't the latter.
Indeed, these are subjective realities. Perhaps, thus guy smoke marijuana and every cable, including the tested one, sounds wonderful for him or he was encouraged by the seller or whatever.
An empirical evidence based on theory is reliable but unlikely that may occur in these threads.