The most detailed speaker cable??

That's the thread where Sean claimed he could hear the difference between
flat and .1db down at 20Khz. Sorry, but this is *exactly* the type of thing
that comes with the cable phenomenon.

I'm supposed to trade in my cables because they're .088 db down at 20 Khz
when driven into a 4 Ohm load?

Let's join the real world.

"The psycho-acoustic data shows that for pure tones at 16kHz the smallest
average detectable difference in level is 3.05 dB. The findings were based on
individuals 20 to 24 years old that had normal hearing to 20 kHz." -- Audio,
July 1994

.1 db down at 20Khz is inaudible, folks.

Anyone basing any theory on the notion that he/she can hear this as an
audible "roll-off" has already lost my attention

Ooops -- Sean won't take a test to prove this amazing hearing acuity?

Wow -- what a surprise!

Exactly what I would expect.

Come on, folks, if your BS meter isn't redlining by now, you need to have it
checked.

What are the properties of the new cable he suggests?

How does it solve this non-existant problem?

Who knows?

How *does* one solve a non-existant problem?

This is exactly what I am talking about.

I think we can do better, folks.

How *does* one solve a non-existant problem

I'd start by being adventurous: bypass the IC connectors and hard-wire b/ween components. Not easy to do when using expensive commercial equipment, I know!
After it's not only the wire that's conducting it's the connectors too: the wire carries what it gets from source connection and the load gets whatever's there after the destination connection.

It looks like this thread took a big turn and went south. Instead of reading analytic white papers, I'd suggest one listens with thier own ears. After all, isn't that what we do... listen? When mariners first set out to sea, people said that they would fall off the edge of the world. It was flat. Why? It was proven, scientific knowledge at that time. And it sure looked convincing on parchment. Well, guess what the earth's round. Listen, listen, listen... Oh yeah... listen. Happy trails, all!

I never asked you to trade in your cables or that i could hear the difference between -.1 dB down at 20 KHz and a flat response. Both of those are false statements that you use to divert attention away from the real facts of the matter.

I simply asked you to listen to some cables within the confines of your system and see if you heard a difference. If you can honestly hear a difference, those differences have to be measurable using the proper tools and test methodology. As i pointed out in that other thread and explained why, ABX tests are flawed. The same tools that could be used to demonstrate that ABX boxes alter the electrical signal that is fed into the speakers is the same device that will show that speaker cables alter the load that the amp responds to and that is fed into the speakers. The fact that you are afraid to perform such a simple test as swapping one high impedance speaker cable for another high impedance speaker cable while you continue to spout the same rhetoric only lessens your credibility.

Eldartford is both an engineer and a cable skeptic, yet he's open minded enough to try such a test. Are you afraid you might actually hear a difference and have to change your mind? If you have such faith in your "cable convictions", here's your chance to prove it to yourself. Sean
>

I'd like to take Sean and Robert E. Greene of TAS and lock them up in a room together and watch the festivities. The esteemed Dr. Greene thinks pretty much like Rsbeck except that he also doesn't care much about source components or amplification. I respect all three of these gentlemen, by the way.

With some audio buddies yesterday, we wanted to evaluate a new IC. The CD player had two sets of outputs, so we used one for one brand and the second for the other brand. The comparison was then done by switching the input on the preamp. The first time through, the system's owner made the switch while music was playing, so "now switching to Brand X", then "back to Brand Y", etc. None of us could hear a meaningful difference. I suggested that the rapid switching was a problem, so we listened to a passage with Brand X and then paused and listened to the same passage with Brand Y. This time through, there were noticeable differences.

My question is this: Which listening procedure is the most flawed? I'm telling this tale and asking this question in this thread because this is exactly what is at issue here. Rsbeck and Dr. Greene would maintain (I'm putting words in their mouths, but indulge me please) that the physics dictate no meaningful differences. Ergo, any differences we believe we hear while listening are imagined or whatever.

There's a sh*tstorm in the Harbeth user's group forum now over the issue of aftermarket bi-wire jumpers. Some users (including me) believe they hear a meaningful improvement when replacing the stock jumper plates with Audience or other third-party jumpers. We have taken considerable harsh criticism from the "scientists", especially REG.

I know we go down this road over and over again in these forums. You don't have to tell me that if *I* can hear a difference, what should I care what the science says. I always make my purchase decisions based on what I hear. Nevertheless, I would like to know what is TRUE because, unlike some audiophiles, I am open-minded to the possibility that my subjective evaluation is not reliable and that I need to temper what I sometimes hear with a pinch of reason.