Cable auditions - Hard Work?

I think there is some truth in what you say Yuri. Audio listening is entirely "subjective." Why is that? Because the ear is an organ that is the ultimate transmitter to the brain. As long as all potential listening experiences are mediated by such a subjective piece of material, one can never truly say that sensory experience is universal. But by the same token, no one else can tell someone else what they hear or do not hear. You can't take what is for you a good, reliable means for evaluating and assume it is more true than another. I'm sure that people do want to hear what they want to hear. So you are right on that score. But by the same token I think it's also very possible for people to hear what they don't want to hear. For example, they might wish that their expensive cable is better than another expensive cable in their system but decide otherwise. And also it might be the case that their cable is better than the other in a different system. So much of this already subjective and context-dependent that you can't make the kind of universal claims you are making here. All you can say is that there is some evidence on A/B comparisons where people couldn't make blind distinctions. This fact raises some question about the reliability of certain high end gear being superior to others. That's fine. What doesn't go is the idea that you can draw too many conclusions from this.

Yuri,When was the last time you cleaned your ears,,,be honest now!Can you hear me now?

Mr Jafox
Maybe the whole point of my posts is that once one reaches an high echelon in the quality of the components in one system, things such as one interconnect cables or fancy power cords make no difference.

You are obviously misconstruing what i am saying here: I am not saying that there is no difference in audio components.. there are marked differences between certain things, but after myself and two other people failed to tell any differences between the same album on SACD and remastered CD on a blind test, i decided to revise my thinking, and evaluate my own perspective on what i am hearing.

Maybe the system we did the SACD vs. CD test on wasn't high-end enough?
maybe two people in their twenties and one in his thirties are going deaf?
maybe the universal player we used for testing sucks?
maybe the SACD was implemented poorly?

The only way to find out the truth is through what you call "silly" testing... the same type of testing statisticians and scientists have been using for years. Very silly indeed.
Sorry, not all of us have silver ears like you, and i need more reliable methods than my own subjectivity to find out what REALLY sounds better.

Does the $1400 trivista tube DAC really sound better than the analog output stage on the Yamaha S2500?
Why should it sound better? just because it is more expensive or because it has great reviews on Audiophile?
Has anyone actually done a real blind test comparison between both units..?

Maybe the analog stage on the Yamaha S2500 is implemented well enough, so there is no audible difference?
You assume i should be hearing a difference, and my point is.. maybe there is none, and that is what intend to find out.

Mr. Jafox... maybe the Emperor is not wearing any clothes.

"Maybe the whole point of my posts ...... "

The whole point of your posts has been a series of consistent themes: 1) Cables and other component swaps in YOUR system have indicated no audible differences by you or others who heard it; 2) because YOU do not hear such differences, they are therefore subjective; 3) all the rest of us are only fooling ourselves by our claimed non-blind tests since these differences may exist "but is not something our human ears can detect".

"is that once one reaches an high echelon in the quality of the components in one system, things such as one interconnect cables or fancy power cords make no difference."

Mary, Mary, quite contrary.

As for your four consecutive MAYBE's: 1) "High-end enough"...now that is subjective.....but the answer to the spirit of your question is: possibly; 2) highly doubtful; 3) possibly; 4) possibly

I never claimed to have silver ears. I simply stated I heard an immediate difference that was validated upon a return to the previous product in the link. I simply did not need the "truth" from blind testing as my ears already made it very clear of the differences.

Please search for the word "better" in all posts of this thread and make a note that I did not use this anywhere in my text. I am talking of differences .... not what is better. That something is or was better was your conclusion, not mine.

You are right, I did wrongfully assume there would likely be a difference between the Yamaha and the Trivista. I have heard a few auditions in the past where differences were just not there for me. And this could be the case here. But the implementation of your test pretty much doomed the opportunity for you to hear any differences if they may have existed. And THAT was what I attempted to point out.

As for the Emperor, I believe he is wearing clothes. He just needs to clean his ears and open his mind to the experiences of others, and not be so conclusive that events that occur for him will necessarily be the same for others.

Mr. Jafox
If i can't even trust my own subjective hearing, i don't think i can trust the subjective hearing of others, specially people who can hear "differences" in power cords, bybee quantum filters, shakti stones, granite stands and speaker cables lifters, LOL

If you want to believe in audio voodoo and marketing hype, go ahead, i will stick to my silly scientific methods, which hopefully will have more validity than the "experience of others"

To anyone who is so sure of your golden ears, i invite you to stop by my place and do some blind tests to see what we can hear.... maybe i am wrong, but at least i am open minded enough not to call blind tests "silly"

Folks, don't believe everything you read.