Do powercords make a difference in sound?

The voices tell me all of you are nutty!!!! I really do hear voices.

hi tbg:

i disagree, but it seems each one of us looks at words and has his own interpretation.

for a reviewer to say there is a benefit of the second amp is not a review.

i would never use such terms in my review.

i have already stated what a review is , namely a statement of the affect of a component upon the sound of a stereo system.

Mrtennis, my sincere apologies if I offended you before.

I was able to find and thought of lifting quotes from this site where you describe the sound characteristics of particular components, something you suggest cannot be done. But, frankly, it would not be done in kindness, and perhaps you would take umbrage.

I find little value in continuing the argument. It's time to refocus on writing.

Blessings to you. :)

i've tended to stay away from this forum because i didn't like the way that the moderator blocked some of my posts, but we'll see if this one gets past the censor...

my advice is that you be vary skeptical of people who assert that there are discernible "sonic" differences between power cords, yet they can't give any explanation as to why that is the case. it's, like, all subjective, so the comments are subject to exogenous influences that have nothing to do with electronics.

you are dealing with expectations: a person who is willing to go out and get a power cord is someone who is seeking a better audio experience; so they are starting out *hoping* that the power cord will make their system sound better. this is aided by visually appealing packaging: expensive-looking packaging, impressive-looking cord thicknesses/end connectors and aesthetically appealing cord sheathing.

you are dealing with personal biases: a person who has already spend a few hundred (if not thousand) dollars on a power cord has a need to feel that he hasn't wasted his money. so, of course such a person will tell you that the power cord made an "immense" difference in his system, even if he can't tell you why.

one of the things that hurts the credibility of high end audio is all the bs and pseudo-science that is promoted to justify $30,000 speaker cables (that you can buy at radio shack for $0.40/foot) and various other "tweaks", which purported make your system sound better. add to this the role of "audiophile" reviewers who often has conflicts of interest in the products that they review (which are not disclosed to the readers).

until i hear one of these reviewers conduct their reviews in blind testing, where they have to comment on the "sonic" qualities of the system without knowing which cords are being used (or even if the cords have been switched from one test to the next), i will not give much credence to the assertions (offered without explanation) of how various cords improve the "sonic" quality of a given component or system.

Paperw8, science is to explain observations. People hear a difference, the question for science is why? I strongly suggest that the easy rules of EE fail to account for all that is important.

But in audio reproduction the quest is realism. If a component or cable improves it that is enough for me. I have participated in the invalid 30 sec. same/different tests and cannot be certain of my answers but with a longer exposure, I have no difficulty. Frankly, I have no interest in double blind which to make an analogy is like assessing what cables sound like under different air pressures.

Frankly, I care little whether you give much credence to non-blind reviews or efforts to grasp how the better cable is better.