So you think wire conductors in cables are directional? Think again...

.

Music for example is not reducible to physical acoustic sorry if you dont know that ....

I don’t even know what this means. If you’re claiming music is not reducible to physical soundwaves you’re wrong.

The rest of your post deals with 2. Human perception of sound.

This thread is about 1. Sound and can it be measured and scientifically tested as to be audibly different according to direction of the conductor. Yes, it can.

I find most of what you post not only wrong but demonstrably wrong. You wander off into areas not relevant to the question trying to prove your dogmatic opinion about not only how sound propagates but how humans perceive sound. The above comment about music isn't soundwaves if I'm deciphering you correctly is laughable. 

I'll quit referencing you in my posts please reciprocate.

djones51

It’s pretty simple , except for little Andy ...

Your little insults do nothing to further your little arguments.

... if you claim to hear differences in cables based on direction, prove it, and proof isn’t me and my buddies tried last weekend. It needs to be a properly controlled blind test.

That is complete nonsense. And we’ve been through this before.

This is a hobbyist’s group, not a scientific forum. No one here owes you proof of anything, ever. If you want others to supply "scientific proof" to suit your sensibilities and listening tests conducted to your specifications, you are in the wrong forum.

So please stop your incessant demands for something that apparently no one here has any intention of providing to you.

Ahem .... I got something the objectivists can chew on. Given the complexity, this will probably take them some times. Unless, djones et al ... can possess sonar capability, hearing by itself is not going to give you accurate localization.

Funny thing is there are numerous examples of people having something very much akin to sonar. It generally is referred to as echolocation, and has been the focus of some experiments/studies, scientific-like and everything ( they probably even use voltmeters and stuff ).

One of the most interesting take-a-ways is that in folks who are really adept at echolocation acoustic information is to an interesting extent processed by the part of the brain usually reserved for visual processing ( which kinda sorta means they see with their ears !? )....

And just taking a wee leap sideways from that ....wonder how this process to develop the ability to use echolocation ( like we all have it though some folks have developed a greater ability in that area...blind people, for obvious reasons...) intersects with the learned ability among some in the audiophile community to play the imaging game with our systems ( which requires, at a minimum, good ears,a well sorted system/acoustic environment, ability to focus attention to acoustic cues/detail, and some imagination to make the leap from purely visual/acoustic data processing to some combination thereof that results in imaging...) ...

Bottom line it may well be we all have the ability to play sonar games and we often do when we sit in front of our systems and get blown away by the imaging...

Cheers

Djones51, you are going about this all wrong. Things like this used to bother me, but I found it is better to let audiophiles have their cable delusions. The more the better. The more they spend on cables the less money they have to spend on the things that matter to sound. That means less competition for us to purchase those items. The more they spend on things that don’t matter the less we need to spend on that do.


Let them twist science with their rather interesting views, let them insult engineers. It tells much about them and they hurt themselves more than anyone else. They make fun of other websites meanwhile the likes of Toole and Pass, and many actual audio experts will post at those sites, not here. People who have moved the science sound forward are not here are they? I did see Ted Denney started to post here though. See what I mean?

I don’t even know what this means. If you’re claiming music is not reducible to physical soundwaves you’re wrong.

My point is that processing of sound by the brain /body is multidimensional, after an article about visual and hearing pathways used by the brain in the processing of sounds impressions, here is an article about the participation of the motor system in the evaluation of timbre experience...

If you dont know that sound experience CANNOT be reduced to pure physics you know nothing.... Sorry....

If many people testimonies said that cable direction is important PERHAPS something is manifested through the complex multidimensional ways the brain/body evaluated sound and could explain or being related to this experience about wired direction...

Are we obliged to be stubborn? Are we obliged to reduce psychoacoustic science to acoustic only and reduce sound experience to some very unidimensional tools in engineering of cables?


We are not.....

By the way accusing me of derailing this thread is pure bad faith.... I already contributed with few interesting articles and even if wires direction experience could be proved to be only a "placebos" , these articles are interesting and NECESSARY because it seems some dont even understand that music processing experience is NOT reducible to acoustic...

A simple example of that is the " musical time concept " which is a body/brain autonomous time unrelated to the time of the clock, which autonomous time is born from the works qualities to be played in an organic manner.......

No maestro direct and conduct an orchestra with the help of a clock to recreate the musical time related to a specific symphonies.... Time here is a WHOLE without parts.....The metronome indication is a start point for the synchronization of the orchestra not an endpoint...The endpoint of an interpretation is a "time" or a complex duration which is qualitatively differentiated and not quantitatively reducible to the equal division parts of a clock....

All other musical concepts could be described this way transecending pure physical acoustic...It is all psychoacoustic science matter for analysis and experiment like in the article i just submit here...

Science is not a "comic book" matter with 2 opposing gangs : the "objectivist" and the "subjectivists"...

I prefer the less stubborn of these 2 gangs here .... But i dont have opinion myself about the subject of directed wiring, i only had a working brain....And i think that perception is NEVER unidimensional.....

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322467774_Embodied_listening_and_timbre_Perceptual_acoustical_and_neural_correlates