James Randi vs. Anjou Pear - once and for all

This ain't Randi and no million dollars at stake but kudos goes to Mike L. who bravely tested some Opus MM versus Monster and was unable to tell the difference in a fair but rather "crude" test that required several minutes to change cables each time on his stupendous system.

details are here

...the test says nothing more than it was difficult to hear a difference with that particular setup but it does lend credence to the idea that cable differences are subtle.

gentlemen:

i have the anjou pear interconnect cable breaking in.

Do you plan to conduct a blind test like Mike Lavigne?

It would be interesting to get your impression.

Or do you accept the cable manufacturers logic that 300 hours of cable break in (synergy with the other equipment etc.) is required to hear differences and that once you disconnect a cable it is back to square one for that cable (so that no A/B test can ever work)?

BTW - aren't these cyrogenically treated (you know stress relieved a la Ed Meitners' discovery that cables "resonate" with a characteristic Q)

Wow, the write-up of the Mike L listening test is excellent. Makes me wonder what it would be like to run a similar test for other components, ones we are more confident make a big difference, such as phono cartridges or speakers. Would be harder to execute and level-matching would be critical. It seems to me that it's worth spending some time with Shadorne's contention that speaker cables have minimal impact. If that's true, as the Mike L test suggests, then the same test should yield different results for transducers and presumably amplifiers. Seems to me that would help lend some credibility to the testing procedure.