M
mojidooji
Enthusiast
I posted a question in another thread asking whether or not this testing procedure was possible and got no answers, so I'm posting this to get some feedback on this idea before looking into it further.
There is a part of the argument of why all “good” cables sound the same that has bothered me; because inductance, capacitance, and resistance are the only properties that effect sound. I say this because it is true if, and only if, all good cables sound the same. People supporting this argument often attempt to prove that cables indeed sound the same by using the least reliable instrument to measure sound quality, besides the ones which cannot detect sound – the brain. Besides the problems of bias and memory, we also must contend with changing metrics, attention span, and the uncertainty of subjective measurement. I am not certain that most people are even capable of recognizing anything but the most blatant differences between two sounds. My point is that the psychological issues probably far outweigh any other single factor, most of the time, so I question the validity of every test method because it cannot control for the most important variable. Without this, no test can be conclusive.
The only way to fix this is to remove the subjective component of the testing process which, I think, means we should redefine “sound quality” before coming up with a more reliable test procedure. Since “sound quality” is purely qualitative, by definition, it is not to be confused with accuracy, which is a measurable quantity consisting of frequency and amplitude over time. I’ve long thought the anti-cable-difference camp was trying to go the wrong way down a one way street, so I think we should dispense with the assumption that resistance, inductance, and capacitance (in a “good” cable) were the only factors we should care about. I don’t think any reasonable person could debate the issue of differences when they are measured in the only relevant units; frequency and amplitude over time.
We can let philosophers debate whether one should purchase more good than can be heard. So, is this possible?
There is a part of the argument of why all “good” cables sound the same that has bothered me; because inductance, capacitance, and resistance are the only properties that effect sound. I say this because it is true if, and only if, all good cables sound the same. People supporting this argument often attempt to prove that cables indeed sound the same by using the least reliable instrument to measure sound quality, besides the ones which cannot detect sound – the brain. Besides the problems of bias and memory, we also must contend with changing metrics, attention span, and the uncertainty of subjective measurement. I am not certain that most people are even capable of recognizing anything but the most blatant differences between two sounds. My point is that the psychological issues probably far outweigh any other single factor, most of the time, so I question the validity of every test method because it cannot control for the most important variable. Without this, no test can be conclusive.
The only way to fix this is to remove the subjective component of the testing process which, I think, means we should redefine “sound quality” before coming up with a more reliable test procedure. Since “sound quality” is purely qualitative, by definition, it is not to be confused with accuracy, which is a measurable quantity consisting of frequency and amplitude over time. I’ve long thought the anti-cable-difference camp was trying to go the wrong way down a one way street, so I think we should dispense with the assumption that resistance, inductance, and capacitance (in a “good” cable) were the only factors we should care about. I don’t think any reasonable person could debate the issue of differences when they are measured in the only relevant units; frequency and amplitude over time.
We can let philosophers debate whether one should purchase more good than can be heard. So, is this possible?