Do powercords make a difference in sound?

The seating position discussion has muddied the waters unnecessarily. I believe the intent was to discuss the fact that other variables are at work, as well as the variable of the sound of the cables. I would hope we all agree that seating postion has no absolute effect upon the performance of the cords. Perceptually, however, the system may sound quite different when seating position is changed, and one might find themselves more agreeable to the system. However, likely not.

It has been my experience that seating position does not have the "power" as a change to radically alter one's perception of what the cords are doing. Yes, I have changed seating positions while working with cords, and no, it has not had a significant effect on my conclusions about how any particular cords sound. While it does alter the experience it does not override the cables' performance when compared. I have selected the same cables as my preference regardless of the seating position (within reason, of course).

Recently, after having the same seating position for five years elected to move my chair 5" closer to the speakers. The sacrifice is in the sharpness of the center image, but in exchange I have more bass presence and a slightly more 3-D soundstage. Doing so has had no impact upon my decisions regarding cables.

I haven not tested the following thought, but it is quite possible that I would prefer a system where I was not in my favorite seating position (i.e. 5" off, like my previous listening position) yet had superior cords versus one where the seating position was "improved" and had poorer cords in use. Going off of my past experiences I would prefer the system with the better cabling.

People who think room treatments and seating position get you 90% of the way "there" (As though cheaper gear set up well will get you almost SOTA sound; it will not) will likely choke on that statement. However, anyone who's conducted tests of sets of cables as I have will likely agree.

Similarly, at times I change the inside angle of my panel speakers; once again this has not changed my conclusions regarding any particular cables.

Based on continued testing I would not consider listening position to be a dominant factor in cable selection.

I still do keep hope alive of someday getting off this thread, but (very simplistically): If you're sitting in one spot, you might react positively to a cord substitution that subjectively tightens the bass response. If you're sitting in another position, even with the same system, you might instead react more positively to a cord substitution that subjectively mellows the treble, or whatever. (The same would also apply to a change in speaker placement, choice of music, etc.) Remember, this is always in relation to the use of some other power cord; it's not possible to compare against no cord at all.* The same goes for listening position -- there is no neutral reference, only preference for a given set of circumstances, and when circumstance changes so may preference.

*[By contrast, it is often possible to evaluate interconnects against the neutral reference of their absence from the chain, rather than purely against one another. It's called bypass-testing, and it's more objective than conventional, subjective substitution testing, but few seem to do it, or even know about it. One easy way to do this, which I use, is by placing two competing interconnects under test into a remote-controllable preamp's A and B tape loops. Then from the listening seat it's a simple matter to, with no switchover delay, select and deselect first loop A a few times, then do the same with loop B, by which method the addition of each interconnect into the chain is compared against the direct feed (the 'bypass', or that interconnect's absence from the chain -- you are NOT switching directly from loop A to loop B; you're switching each loop in and out of the chain in turn, always listening next to the direct feed as your baseline reference). Whichever of the two interconnects alters the sound the least (or least objectionably) as compared with the direct feed wins the round (and can advance to a subsequent round if more than two interconnects are being tested). If you've never done something like this before, you might be surprised at actually 'hearing' your interconnects in isolation for the first time.]

And since I'm posting, I'll risk adding that I don't subscribe to the notion, advanced above, that changing out a whole suite of 'em in unison is the best way to evaluate power cords. The choice shouldn't be between exchanging two different cords between two components, which is obviously confounding, or else going to that other extreme. As with any test, it's always best to hold the variables down to a single controlled one if possible. In this case that means substituting one cord on one component while the others are held constant. In the case of changing out all the cords together, to me that's unecessarily introducing too many variables at once; you may certainly get a feel for the 'sound' of that new model of cord vs. whatever suite of cords was replaced, but not for how that cord synergizes with each individual component, which means you may overshoot the mark and miss the optimum configuration. Of course one may work one's way toward progressively replacing them all with the new cord, after having thoroughly evaluated that model by serially substituting it throughout the existing system (as ultimately happened with me), but I expect that for most audiophiles, like for myself, acquiring multiple duplicate cords before having even comprehensively evaluated a single example represents a putting of the cart before the horse and is unrealistic. (I also don't buy the notion, however helpful and comforting it may be, that one must hear any changes obviously and immediately or else they are rendered definitionally insignificant.)

let me add one statement which should end the discussion:

whether power cord a sounds different than power cord b in a stereo system is a function of a listener's perception. end of story.

i don't think it is necessary to justify one position or another.

oops that's two statements. sorry.

08-22-11: Zaikesman
I'll ask you your own question in modified form: If your impression of the sound of a speaker were to change with listening position (and of course it would), would you then conclude that the speaker "fails to exhibit consistent audible characteristics" and expect it not to necessarily display any similarities in another setting?

This is an interesting question, and one that had not occurred to me. My answer is of course no, I would not conclude from differences in sound from one listening position to another that a speaker fails to exhibit consistent audible characteristics. The reason is because I have some idea of WHY a speaker’s sound changes from one listening position to another, including things like the speaker’s radiation pattern, diffraction, room reflections, room modes, etc..

In the case of power cords, however, I have no idea why a power cord would sound different from one listening position to another. The whole idea is a bit of a puzzle to me. I think you mean something like this…

If you're sitting in one spot, you might react positively to a cord substitution that subjectively tightens the bass response. If you're sitting in another position, even with the same system, you might instead react more positively to a cord substitution that subjectively mellows the treble, or whatever…Remember, this is always in relation to the use of some other power cord; it's not possible to compare against no cord at all.

What puzzles me about this statement is the attribution of the differences heard TO THE POWER CORD ITSELF. I understand that, in situations where the introduction of a new component results in a change in the sound, there is a natural temptation to conclude that the change heard is attributable to the component introduced. But that is precisely the reasoning I was challenging in my initial post on 8/18, when I wrote…

…one of the most recurring flaws in the thinking of many audiophiles, namely that…

If using component X results in audible difference Y, then audible difference Y is attributable to component X.

On the face of it, this statement appears to be not only true, but self evident. But under quite common circumstances, it is false. Specifically, it’s false when the audible difference resulting from the use of a component is an EXTRINSIC characteristic of that component.

But now we're back where we started! :-o

Something tells me that we’ve come about as far as we’re going to. I appreciate your thoughtful comments, Zaikesman. This has been an interesting thread, and it’s piqued my curiosity to experiment further. It isn’t a consensus, but it’s something.

Bryon