Cables more hype than value?

The case against empirical evidence.
1) Your ears don't hear sound, they hear wires, which all sound the same.
2) What we know so far, scientifically, is to be discarded regarding our hearing
since all wires conduct sound the same way, so why bother trying?
3) Our hearing limits are confined to the way all wires pass a signal, which are the same, and not the sound we actually hear.
4) Well trained ears hear only wires and amps, not the sound they produce.
5) No amount of money can change the sound a wire makes.
6) Any metal in the form of a wire will sound the same so just sit back and enjoy.

The case for empirical evidence:
It makes a lot more sense than the above.
:-)

All the best,
Nonoise

Rok2id, I've been where you are, done what you have, in that I tried to argue the unarguable on the Audiogon cable forum. You are absolutely, positively correct, and it won't make slightest bit of difference to those who are convinced they can hear differences attributable to anything from cryo-treated electrical outlets to USB cables. I think it was in 2006 I amused myself with a few posts, and finally walked away, sated from the arguments. You can't win. You should come over to Audioholics, where more reasonable discussions prevail.

The Cable Lie, as Peter Aczel called it, is the most pernicious of all of the myths in audio, mostly meant to separate people from their money. I should emphasize that I don't want to demean high quality materials and good workmanship. A well-made, beautiful cable, that's solidly built with great connectors can have the same sort of intrinsic value advantage that a Breitling watch has over a plastic electronic thing. Most of us would rather have the Breitling, though they both tell time equally well. Aesthetic value is still value. But the notion that two properly designed and constructed cables for a particular application will sound different is just plain wrong.

You can argue with the true believers until your wear our your keyboard and it won't change anything.

Irvrobinson:

You are absolutely correct in everything you said. I think I will take your advice and go watch 'Gunsmoke'.

Glad to see the Peter Aczel reference. He is a real hero in the field of audio.

Cheers

Thanks for the support. It gets lonely on this place. :)

02-23-13: Audiolabyrinth
@ Rok2id,no my entire system cost $70,000.00 ,not the cables!,thou the cables did cost more than the componets,as time gos,I can move up the componet food chain and not worry about changing cables ever!cheers!

02-23-13: Rok2id
Audiolabyrinth my friend, it just don't work like that. If you change a component. you must change the cables, because these things are very carefully matched and any component change requires the wire to be changed.

Rok2id makes a valid point here, IMO.

From a technical standpoint, see my post in this thread dated 2-18-13, and the second of the two links I provided in that thread. From an anecdotal standpoint, findings that cable performance tends to be system dependent have been cited in a great many past threads here and elsewhere, by people whose ideological views on cables fall well within the "believer" part of the spectrum.

Concerning the broader issue that is being, um, discussed here, I would point out that a belief that cables can sound different, to which I subscribe, says nothing about the degree of correlation that can be expected between cable performance and cable price. The aforementioned system dependency, which as I said can be supported both technically and anecdotally, would seem to be one reason (among many others that could be cited) to expect that correlation to be a loose one.

Regards,
-- Al

It really is interesting how widely differing the opinions are on this topic. I have personally done double blind listening tests on cables with a group of listeners who all without exception picked in one test that changing one power cord connecting the CD player (NBS Statement extreme to a Stereolab Dragon Widowmaker) without a doubt improved the sound.