2. misc-audio
  3. 1383246560

Objective vs. Placebo relating to system changes

I am continually baffled by the number of people that are convinced that changes to power cords, speaker wires, interconnects, etc. in their systems result is objectively real changes. While I won't go so far as saying that making these changes absolutely doesn't make a difference, I would love to have the resources to challenge people prove it to me and test it with my own ears.

Here's what I would do if time and financial resources were no object (I'm visualizing retired millionaires that are audiophiles).

I would build a listening room where the only components in the listening space were the speakers and the speaker cables coming through opening in the wall where the rest of the system was setup. The idea would be to allow the test subject the opportunity to create their system of choice and then have the opportunity to become very familiar with the system by spending hours listening. Then I would let them know when I was going to start changing different components on them on a very random basis and they should report any changes that they heard so we could link the changes to any potential changes on the other side of the wall.

Here's a short list of things that I'd try:

(1) I would replace the upgraded power cord with the stock unit.
(2) I would install or remove isolation (e.g. Nordost sort kones) devices from a component.
(3) I would replace interconnects with basic quailty products.
(4) I would replace well "broken-in" cables with otherwise identical new ones.

Depending on the results of doing these test slowly over a period of time I would consider swapping out some of the more major components to see how obvious a macro change was if the listener wasn't aware that a change had been made.

I can tell the difference between new and broken in speakers (on ones that I'm familiar with) so I know this break-in is very real and would also not be at all surprised with differences from amplifiers and analog sources being obvious. I'm not as sure about digital sources.

So the question is, what components in your system would you be confident enough to bet, say $1,000, that you could identify that something changes if it was swapped out?

In my system I am sure that I could identify a change in amplification or speakers, but highly doubt that I could do the same with any cables, isolation devices, or digital sources. Maybe I just reduced myself to being a non-audiophile with low-fi gear?
mceljo
metralla
945 posts
 
Maybe he is a Civil Engineer (my first area of study). We learnt physics and applied maths and basic electrical engineering.

Could have an "engineering mind" without specific knowledge of electronics.

Regards,
mceljo OP
1,357 posts
 
My engineering degree is a general engineering degree with an emphasis in civil engineering and I tailored my classes towards structural stuff. I am almost always thinking about something and it is audio stuff right now. It ranges to cars, religion, etc. I don't claim to know everything and am willing to get the opinion of others. As for the science related to audio I have a little bit of general knowledge and will run things that don't make sense to me by my EE that is also into audio. He does his best to explain things to me, but it usually takes a few tries. Neither of us has ever owned a tube amp so asked the question knowing I would get a wide range of answers so that I could evaluate where I want to be.
metralla
945 posts
 
My engineering degree is a general engineering degree with an emphasis in civil engineering

There you go - I guessed correctly.

Regards,
nonoise's avatar
nonoise
10,972 posts
 
The underlying and often understated meme here is the expense of trying things. If one was financially set then it would be nothing more than a matter of trying things to see if one could hear a difference that resulted in a better outcome. One wouldn't entertain the cost unless extravagant.

I always notice qualifiers when folk speak of how far they would go, as do I.
It wouldn't be too much for me to state that deep pockets are the luxury of those who can afford to see just how much, or little, an improvement can be made for much, or little outlay.

As far as I'm concerned, what one can and can't hear is totally up to ones ears and no one else. As far as advertisement goes, it's a given that hype and spin will be used by some but not all, so generalities are just that, generalities, and have no place as the sole point in an argument about efficacy of tweaks, cables and the like.

All the best,
Nonoise
frogman
7,488 posts
 
No matter how much discussing, arguing, theorizing or amount of skepticism, some truths will always be truths:

- wether because of natural ability, or training and willingness to be open-minded, not every listener will posses the same level of hearing acuity.

- the sound of music and the electronic signals that it is converted to for our convenience are so complex, and hence fragile, that just about anything you do will affect the audible characteristics TO SOME DEGREE. Wether any given listener is capable of hearing those effects is a different story.

- of course there's quackery and placebo; so what?, it doesn't change the above.
More to discover