James Randi and Fremer of Stereophile to test

[mtrycrafts]

Just reading this at the Randi foundation page
http://www.randi.org/joom/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=97&Itemid=27

That it looks like Michael Fremer, senior contributing editor, will take the challenge if the protocols are agreed upon
So, finally, maybe, someone in audio will get to demonstrate their skills.

The article and diatribe from Fremer is of interest as well.

 

[stratman]

The guy from Pear cables is unbelievable. They have to be horrified of the test, you know how many people that bought $7000.00 cables are going to start suing? Or can they be that dumb? Well I guess if you spent $7000.00 on cables to begin with, yup. Still, I hope they do the test, though I think Fremer and company will back off if it gets too serious.

 

[mike c]

you do realize he probably has no intention of going through the test.

I saw this writeup days ago, and I refused to post it here because it is just plain hype. he wants us and audiophiles to talk about his cables, free hype and advertising ... and he hasn't even taken the test yet.

there are so many things wrong with this:
-first, what if he introduced some sort of "EQ" on his cable, one that is easily recognizable
-second, he will probably disagree with some protocol about this and that ... so as NOT to take the test.
-third, the pearl cable guy looks like an a$$

 

[MDS]

If it goes down like nearly every other blind listening challenge, the audiophile will help to design the test protocol, select the equipment and musical selections...and then fail the test. After failing the test, claims will be made that the test was flawed and couldn't possibly show the difference that is 'obvious'.

 

[Davemcc]

It seems to be a strange test from what I read on that link. I can see Fremer's hesitence to take the challenge. If he wins by hearing the differences in cables, Randi claims that victory to be of a paranormal nature. Fremer claims no paranormal ability and does not want that association attached to a victory, should he win. That seems reasonable.

 

[mtrycrafts]

The guy from Pear cables is unbelievable. They have to be horrified of the test, you know how many people that bought $7000.00 cables are going to start suing? Or can they be that dumb? Well I guess if you spent $7000.00 on cables to begin with, yup. Still, I hope they do the test, though I think Fremer and company will back off if it gets too serious.

No, they are never horrified as they have a bag full of excuses. The guy taking the test had a day off in his ability, he had a cold and could not hear, etc. Just look at all the satisfied customers' letters, etc. And, that is all they need for the gullible to be satisfied.

If you read the rest of that page, about that UFO film in the 'critical thinking' class how easy it is to convert an otherwise thinker is amazing.

 

[mtrycrafts]

you do realize he probably has no intention of going through the test.

I saw this writeup days ago, and I refused to post it here because it is just plain hype. he wants us and audiophiles to talk about his cables, free hype and advertising ... and he hasn't even taken the test yet.

there are so many things wrong with this:
-first, what if he introduced some sort of "EQ" on his cable, one that is easily recognizable
-second, he will probably disagree with some protocol about this and that ... so as NOT to take the test.
-third, the pearl cable guy looks like an a$$

Is Fremer going to use that Pearl cable or something else?
They will probably measure the cable if it has a box in it and see how the FR is at audio frequency. The other cables out with a box is about RF rejection so it has no effect on the audio band.
If it EQs, either it is not testable then, re-eq the setup and then test.

 

[race4aliving]

I think we should put this up on "PayPer Veiw".
I know ALOT of people would love to see these snake oil salesmen get their A . .es handed to them and totally debunk the myths.
I think it could open up a whole new form of enterainment. REAL LIVE AUDIO MYTHBUSTERS. any body holding any stock in theses blackhearted Physcoaccustical shils should ditch there equipment now, or risk being outed for being sad sheep who throw LARGE amounts of money, just to be part of "in the crowd".

 

[mike c]

Is Fremer going to use that Pearl cable or something else?
They will probably measure the cable if it has a box in it and see how the FR is at audio frequency. The other cables out with a box is about RF rejection so it has no effect on the audio band.
If it EQs, either it is not testable then, re-eq the setup and then test.

yup, one of his "products" will be used as test piece ... he has some "entry-level, mid-level and some crazy upper-level" cables

I wasn't even talking about a box - that would be too obvious, his cable could have some sort of bottleneck or something in the middle? (gauge 30 should make a difference right?)

 

[Wafflesomd]

How come no has just, tested different cables with the same speaker and amp, and get frequency response graphs to record it all.

 

[mtrycrafts]

yup, one of his "products" will be used as test piece ... he has some "entry-level, mid-level and some crazy upper-level" cables

I wasn't even talking about a box - that would be too obvious, his cable could have some sort of bottleneck or something in the middle? (gauge 30 should make a difference right?)

Sure a 30ga speaker wire would matter since a 24ga was audible in a past test. That would not be a test candidate that is acceptable, I am sure. I thought his cables were in the 12ga neighborhood, no?
And, if the cable had something, it would show up on a FR test and needs parts to alter FR.

 

[mtrycrafts]

I think we should put this up on "PayPer Veiw".
I know ALOT of people would love to see these snake oil salesmen get their A . .es handed to them and totally debunk the myths.
I think it could open up a whole new form of enterainment. REAL LIVE AUDIO MYTHBUSTERS. any body holding any stock in theses blackhearted Physcoaccustical shils should ditch there equipment now, or risk being outed for being sad sheep who throw LARGE amounts of money, just to be part of "in the crowd".

I seriously doubt it would phase the faithful one bit. They would have some excuse in the bottomless excuse barrel.

 

[mtrycrafts]

How come no has just, tested different cables with the same speaker and amp, and get frequency response graphs to record it all.

Oh, someone has:

http://bruce.coppola.name/audio/cableInteractions.pdf

Two of the graphs show just what you want, two different speakers and perhaps amps too.

 

[Rickster71]

Why Paranomal??

The Foundation is committed to providing reliable information about paranormal claims. It both supports and conducts original research into such claims.
At JREF, we offer a one-million-dollar prize to anyone who can show, under proper observing conditions, evidence of any paranormal, supernatural, or occult power or event.

Why are the Testers injecting, "evidence of any paranormal, supernatural, or occult power" into this test?

They should just perform a proper double blind study!

The "paranormal crap, merely give a possible escape route / excuse for the Testee. Or should I say "another excuse" for the testee?

 

[mtrycrafts]

The Foundation is committed to providing reliable information about paranormal claims. It both supports and conducts original research into such claims.
At JREF, we offer a one-million-dollar prize to anyone who can show, under proper observing conditions, evidence of any paranormal, supernatural, or occult power or event.

Why are the Testers injecting, "evidence of any paranormal, supernatural, or occult power" into this test?

They should just perform a proper double blind study!

The "paranormal crap, merely give a possible escape route / excuse for the Testee. Or should I say "another excuse" for the testee?

That was their original mission, to test those claims. They can test whatever they agree to test, period. Same as for dowsing that does not involve any paranormal event. It is not an excuse to get out of jail. And, if you read the link, it is in there that they accept this test, especially since they are the ones made the offer to test the claimants in the first place and no paranormal event is needed.

 

[Joe Schmoe]

Why are the Testers injecting, "evidence of any paranormal, supernatural, or occult power" into this test?

Because speaker cables do not make any audible difference. To reliably identify a particular cable by ear would, therefore, be supernatural.

 

[Rob Babcock]

I've always admired James Randi, but in this case Fremer has a valid point- as a condition of the test, Randi says that Fremer winning the challenge will be evidence of paranormal powers! Fremer is a bit of a flake but doesn't think hearing cable differences is paranormal at all; he thinks there are audible differences. Randi is a bit wide of the mark here, IMO. Certainly there must be a chance that some real, physical property, even one we haven't yet learned to measure, could be at work as opposed to the occult?

I'm cable agnostic. While I can't honestly say I've heard differences between well designed cables, I do "hedge my bets" to a degree. I wouldn't spend $7,000 on a set of cables if I was a millionaire but I will and have spend $200 on a digital cable or IC. And I have little sympathy for the cuckoos that buy Shatki Stones, but I'm willing to admit that my ignorance of something or inability to hear a difference doesn't automatically equate to that difference being imaginary. Randi is correct that rigorous scientific testing will determine if one is able to tell the two apart, but any claim of being able to tell why or how the difference was detected would seem to be idle speculation on his part.

Of course, The Foundation exists to debunk supernatural claims and expose hucksters and con men. This seems a bit out of his normal area of concern but it's his Foundation!

 

[Tom Andry]

Well, let’s leave out the designation “paranormal,” then, since it seems that it intrudes on your sensitivity standards.

Seems like he's willing to remove this particular obstacle.

 

[krabapple]

Fremer knows what he's doing and Randi seems unfortunately a bit clueless right now. Here's Fremer (who appears to use Tara Labs speaker cables) in the midst of a complaint about the last few days' happenings, on he JREF news feedback pages:

http://www.randi.org/joom/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=105&Itemid=2

Now I read about a conspiracy to "doctor" my reference cable. Well folks, if it can be so doctored what does that tell you? It tells you that cables can be made to sound different by altering, among other things, the inductance, capacitance and resistance of the cable. All of that is easily pre-determined by cable construction and geometry, not VOODOO. In addition different dialectrics have different storage properties (store and release electrical energy). All of this can be altered in a cable recipe and those are some of the very differences I CLAIM TO BE ABLE TO HEAR. DUH! When cable is "designed," the designer works with all of those factors, which all interact, to produce his final product. Leaving cost aside for the moment, the post about "doctoring" the cable proves that cables can and do sound different.

Note 1) he doesn't claim not to have doctored his Taras, but even if not 2) he's well aware that cables CAN be made to 'sound different' for clearly understood , nonmystical reasons (though he can't help including some flooby as well) that give the cable a non-flat frequency response in the audible band...whihc is to say, make them act as crude equalizers. And no doubt he;s aware that some 'boutique' cables beloved of audiophiles do just that...they aren't designed to be 'just cables', which everywhere else are simply pieces o wire meant to convey a signal as accurately as possible. Similarly some 'boutique' amps are so badly designed (by normal standards of engineering) that they can be sent into oscillation unless one uses the 'right' (filtered) cables.

Randi seems more or less oblivious to this, despite claiming to understand that
R/C/L can be 'adjusted' to make a cable audible. He says he's OK with using Tranparent brand cables instead of the Pears, for instance, even though the Transparents are rather suspect(they use 'network boxes', which appear to be passive filters)...and he doesn;t seem to know what an 'interconnect' is. Whoever is giving Randi advice on this is failing him. At the very least Randi needs to stipulat that all cables compared in the challenge be bench-tested beforehand to weed out 'equalizers'. I hope his side shapes up because it would be sweet to get an obnoxious flooby champion like Fremer (he of the demagnetized LPs) to participate in an honest cable comparison.

 

[masak_aer]

Seems like he's willing to remove this particular obstacle.

http://www.randi.org/joom/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=97&Itemid=1

"We define "paranormal" as describing an event or a phenomenon that can actually be shown to occur, but has no explanation within scientific reasoning.

That’s our definition. Bearing in mind that dictionaries do not give definitions, but only usages, Webster’s Dictionary – the Random House College Edition – gives this usage:

…pertaining to events or perceptions occurring without scientific explanation, as clairvoyance or extrasensory perception.

Detecting differences between two varieties of excellent conductors of low-voltage electrical signals – speaker leads – via a direct auditory test, would fall within this usage.

Regardless, we of course have the right to accept this claim as paranormal in nature, and we hereby do accept it as such. We will even create, for the purposes of this experimental protocol, a special category of "golden ears," just for you. "

He does.