2. cables
  3. 1133143087

a great take on big$ cables

i was talkin to a friend about cables & wire's & no matter how hard i try to tell him its not needed he wont budge because he has heard that big buck wires are the way to go,i even showed him this web page & after reading it his response was this "if they didnt work then why would they sell them" after talking for hours i gave up & gave him a demo,he heard no difference & neither did i but he still believe's.

there isnt alot of info published on wires except by manufacturer's so i thought i'd post this so every body could enjoy it.

this is a link to roger russell's web site where he gives his thought's on wire's & cable's & reports on blind testing that was done,if your not familuar with him he was a audio engineer for many years & from some of the gear i own that he designed i'd say a damm fine engineer too.

if you are of the belief that big buck cable's are not worth using you may get a chuckle but if your a firm believer then you might be bummed out,anyway's here's the link if you care to read about wire's.

{http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm}
128x128bigjoe
mark02131's avatar
mark02131
99 posts
 
My Theary is that cables should not make a difference. They should not "get in the way" of the audio signal. I can hear a difference between some cables and I wonder why they are "modifying" my music, I have to have cables that will leave the music alone.

I had an 8 ft pair of cardas quad link 5's (300.00 a pair). I needed longer cables so I had to go a cheaper route. I went with www.Signalcable.com I got a 35ft pair for 280.00 and it transformed my system. The sound stage is wider, deeper,and everything is more natural and open sounding.

This tells me I don't need super expensive cables, I just need the right ones.
pabelson
344 posts
 
My claim is very simple. Since the method proposed (i.e. DBT) is worthless (and there is lots of scientific data that says that is true) for determining audible differences

There is not a shred of "scientific" evidence that says any such thing. If you have to make up science to prove your point, you've lost the argument.
serus
93 posts
 
Mark02131:
There is not a shred of "scientific" evidence that says any such thing
Not the DBT itself, but in regard to our sonic memory. But why hypothesize about it? Try it yourself as I proposed with a boombox and your $$$$ system.
I've been a participant in one well-conducted DBT and I've talked with the person which ran the test. He has quite a bit of experience and scientific background in audible perceptions and I believe his word is quite credible when he tells me that there is enough scientific data on the subject to show that statisticaly most participants are just guessing.
I'm interested in any other data do you have that supports other conclusions.
pabelson
344 posts
 
Serus: Go talk to your friend again. You didn't understand what he was telling you. When things sound the same, subjects are indeed just guessing. When they don't, they aren't, and they get statistically significant positive results. I posted a whole list of resources on DBTs on another thread (Reviews with all double blind testing). Go take a look. Then you'll understand why people really can hear differences between boomboxes and better systems--but not necessarily between cables.
serus
93 posts
 
Then you'll understand why people really can hear differences between boomboxes and better systems
Same speakers (for frequency response) and level matched? Is that a real claim - or a guess? I'm smiling here... cause I know the answer...
More to discover