What ever happened to high Fidelity cables? That guy all of a sudden just shut his doors and stop making product. Nobody has stepped in to fill his void. I wonder why? He probably had one of the best sales pitches out there for Trine his cables. I really wonder if the magnets made a difference. I’m skeptical and he was the only one that I considered trying. I spoke to him on the phone one day and he wanted me to buy used sad that he had that was near the top of his offerings. I think he wanted to thousand dollars for the cable But would not take them back if I didn’t like them. It was either I took the deal with no return or no deal. That in itself made me skeptical so I didn’t do it. I really wonder why nobody has started making cables with magnets, now that he’s out of business .
Why HiFi Gear Measurements Are Misleading (yes ASR talking to you…)
About 25 years ago I was inside a large room with an A-frame ceiling and large skylights, during the Perseid Meteor Shower that happens every August. This one time was like no other, for two reasons: 1) There were large, red, fragmenting streaks multiple times a minute with illuminated smoke trails, and 2) I could hear them.
Yes, each meteor produced a sizzling sound, like the sound of a frying pan.
Amazed, I Googled this phenomena and found that many people reported hearing this same sizzling sound associated with meteors streaking across the sky. In response, scientists and astrophysicists said it was all in our heads. That, it was totally impossible. Why? Because of the distance between the meteor and the observer. Physics does not allow sound to travel fast enough to hear the sound at the same time that the meteor streaks across the sky. Case closed.
ASR would have agreed with this sound reasoning based in elementary science.
Fast forward a few decades. The scientists were wrong. Turns out, the sound was caused by radiation emitted by the meteors, traveling at the speed of light, and interacting with metallic objects near the observer, even if the observer is indoors. Producing a sizzling sound. This was actually recorded audibly by researchers along with the recording of the radiation. You can look this up easily and listen to the recordings.
Takeaway - trust your senses! Science doesn’t always measure the right things, in the right ways, to fully explain what we are sensing. Therefore your sensory input comes first. You can try to figure out the science later.
I’m not trying to start an argument or make people upset. Just sharing an experience that reinforces my personal way of thinking. Others of course are free to trust the science over their senses. I know this bothers some but I really couldn’t be bothered by that. The folks at ASR are smart people too.
- ...
- 406 posts total
alexatpos,
Again, it’s clear that you have a bias operating that is causing you to place a very negative spin on someone else’s perspective. You are seeing "sins" that are not there. First, I have not "demanded" you do anything. I have given my justification for how I personally approach claims about audio gear. Yes, some of the justification entails my not simply believing everything you or any other audiophile claims to hear, because I’m aware of the problem of all too human bias in our perception. But why would any mature adult see that as "rude?" First of all: do you think all opinions, claims and viewpoints are equally likely and justified? Surely that can’t be, right? If I have the opinion the earth is flat...do you think it is wrong..."ill mannered" even to give reasons why that belief is likely in error? If someone claims to see X-rays, should that be greeted as equally probable? If someone points out why that is extremely unlikely, why should any reasonable adult greet that as "ill mannered" rather than "trying to be informative?" Why would we have a strange "anything goes, all things are equally probable on anyone’s opinion" in high end audio? That doesn’t make sense, right? So if an audiophile is saying "I hear a difference between my expensive USB cable and a properly functioning off-the-shelf USB cable"...someone skeptical of that idea would have to explain WHY they are skeptical. That would include appeal to the nature of how USB/digital signals work and why such claims are unlikely, and also to scientific facts about how our biases can influence our perception, to "perceive" things that aren’t there. If you take such arguments as being out of bounds and "ill mannered" - because they dare to question the ideas of another audiophile - then you are practicing a religious-like dogmatism, a sort of "questioning anyone's personal view or claimed experience is heresy and not to be countenanced here!" Why be like that? My son was involved in a study for a new allergy treatment. It was double blinded placebo controlled. We weren’t allowed to know if he was recieving the active ingrediant or the placebo. Why? Because bias effects - imagining side effects, misinterpreting things etc - are well known variables that need to be controlled for. Would it have been mature of us to say "How DARE you challenge OUR ability to know what we are experiencing! Your lack of trust is INSULTING!" That would be just a pure misunderstanding of the real problem the study is designed to address, right? Yet this is just the type of behavior one often sees here lest anyone voice some skepticism which also has some basis on the facts we really can imagine differences and misperceive things, in audio as anywhere else. It’s greeted, as you are greeting it, as if it’s "rude" and some personal attack. I’m trying to get you to see this bias because it would be much more fruitful for discussions here if you - and others - stop interpreting any challenge to what you believe, even strongly, as an attack or "rude." It really is that type of reaction that sets these discussions off course. It starts with actually admitting "I Could Be Wrong." Which is always my own assumption and why I’m open to any discussion about why I could be wrong. |
@amir_asr, I have a few questions regarding measuring equipment. Genuine questions, not “poking the bear” nonsense.
As we know, all of the individual components in any particular model have specified tolerances, typically ranging between +/- 1% and +/- 20%. Is it possible for a measurable performance difference between two random samples of the same model to result if some of those tolerances stack up one way vs. another, and, if so, can the measured differences be audible? If measurable differences between two otherwise identical units are possible, then what would be the random sample size necessary to generate a reliable prediction of worst-case, average, and best-case performance?
Some of the units you have tested were provided directly by the manufacturer or distributor, raising the question of whether or not you received a “golden sample” for your testing. Some of your test units that were submitted by members were discontinued years ago, and many of those were provided by individuals who bought them used in unknown condition. Does either of these situations lead to any additional scrutiny with respect to those units being representative samples?
Thanks in advance for your insight. |
Hey @prof that’s the logical fallacy known as the strawman argument. In fact, I’ve never seen anyone here make that claim, yet you put quotes around it. In your next post, you opine:
You commit the sin you blame on others. All your words can’t conceal that. |
- 406 posts total