Oh no, not cables again, but...

[toquemon]

You will say that i'm mad, but i think I can prove it in a DBT. I think you're right about the quality of the cable but i'm pretty sure that some people can detect the "absence" easier than the "addition".

 

[mtrycrafts]

mtrycrafts:

i respect your obviously greater technical expertise, and your opinions, all of which are well supported by studies, tests, etc. i can only report what i hear, or don't hear.

Thanks and yes, I appreciate your report and I offer and pass along why your perception most likely was unreliable at best. After all, that is one of the outcomes of scientific inquiry over the many decades of research in all fields of science.




as for the differences i heard between the audioquest & m850, it was only in the mid range

Cables just cannot affect just the mid band like that. No humps in the mid band only. If there is an affect to the frequency response, it if a uniform roll off towards the high end. It can start in the mid band, but then it doesn't return to normal flat response afterwards, unless you involve active circuits.



one set of interconnects was hooked to the 2 channel audio out of a denon 2910, the other interconnect was hooked to the front outputs of the multichannel output, and both sets of interconnects were then connected to a B&K ref 5 stereo pre-amp, which allowed for switching from one to the other and back, on the same speakers/amplifier, etc.

So you have two sources of outputs you are comparing, not the two sets of wires from one source. This is not acceptable unless you know that both outputs are identical in volume level, etc.
Second, you didn't control for bias, at the minimum a single blind protocol which is only so-so.
This is where your troubles multiply.


i understand that it is not double blind nor particularly scientific, but it worked for my purposes.

Yes, it may work for your purposes but that is all it worked for and cannot draw any conclusion about what your perceptions were.

 

[mtrycrafts]

¿Had somebody studied the following phenomenon: The abscence not the addition, for example, when i first purchased my DVD Player i used a "normal" toslink cable. After a while a bought a "better" toslink cable and i compared them. No difference at all but I left the "better" cable connected. After some 6 months I decided to use a dedicated CD Player for audio so I disconnected the "better" cable and connected the "normal" cable (just like it was at the beginning). I was very surprised to notice that de "normal" cable was a worst performer at high frequencies than the "better" cable. The curious thing is that at first I didn't notice any difference at all. For me It was easier to notice the "absence" not the "addition".

What do you guys think?

It may be easier for you to notice an absence but unless you compare them properly, bias controlled, perceptions are not reliable for others to make decisions on. Nor should you.
It just cannot affect the highs. The digital signal is there, or it is history totally. That you will hear but not that it is less, cannot happen.

Perception and bias. Senses are too easy to fool. The brain will fill in what it wants, whenever it wants to.

 

[mtrycrafts]

You will say that i'm mad,

Not at all. after all, it is human nature and how we evolved. The brain fills emptiness, or a no change as it is looking for differences. Have you seen an ant only after it started moving and was not visible consciously to you standing still? Or anything small?

but i think I can prove it in a DBT.

That is what is needed.
Just make sure you can repeat this experiment under DBT, get consistent outcomes.


but i'm pretty sure that some people can detect the "absence" easier than the "addition".

Maybe, maybe not. Doesn't matter what clues are used to differentiate as long as you can a sufficient amount of times not to be a random outcome only.

 

[mulester7]

after all, it is human nature and how we evolved. The brain fills emptiness, or a no change as it is looking for differences. Have you seen an ant only after it started moving and was not visible consciously to you standing still? Or anything small?

....Mtry, you're classifying humans like in that movie Soylent Green where the humans were ground up for food at factories....can ya' hear me down there in that double-blind hole?....huh?.....

 

[toquemon]

What i want to point out is that maybe DBT procedures are bad designed. In many DBT tests, the "addition" is measured without giving enough time to the subject to listen for a long period of time. That explains (to me) why so many people fail. What do you guys think about that?

 

[lbjazz]

mtrycrafts:

Yes, it may work for your purposes but that is all it worked for and cannot draw any conclusion about what your perceptions were.

All of this talk about double blind testing and making sure everything is "perfect." Hell, I don't care what the results are when the cable, cd player, dvd player, FREAKING 8 TRACK PLAYER, etc. are tested with a rack of equipment costing more than I will make in my entire life. I care about what it sounds like in my pathetic little system.

DISCLAIMER: I don't believe in exotic cables any more than any of you do. I work at a BB and buy the AR cables. Did somebody say EMPLOYEE DISCOUNT! :-D

 

[mtrycrafts]

What i want to point out is that maybe DBT procedures are bad designed. In many DBT tests, the "addition" is measured without giving enough time to the subject to listen for a long period of time. That explains (to me) why so many people fail. What do you guys think about that?

No, no. no. The DBT is not badly designed. The listener is allowed to use whatever method they wish to differentiate a difference; that includes a lack of something.

And, time is on your side. Again, no one is forcing you to make hasty choices. One DBT went on for months and is published. I think you are grasping at straws. Best if you sit down to a DBT and you pick the time length and how you make choices.

Besides, long term listening is grossly flawed as your memory for small differences are in the order of seconds, not hours, days or months. Just a small fact collected by acoustic scientists over time. You are not required to do a DBT. You can make choices without it. That is a personal choice. But, when people present claims, stand by for scrutiny.

 

[mtrycrafts]

....Mtry, you're classifying humans ?.....

I did? How so? Are they not gullible? The brain doesn't fill in missing info, or no info? Please clarify. You are hurting my feeling

 

[mtrycrafts]

All of this talk about double blind testing and making sure everything is "perfect." Hell, I don't care what the results are when the cable, cd player, dvd player, FREAKING 8 TRACK PLAYER, etc. are tested with a rack of equipment costing more than I will make in my entire life. I care about what it sounds like in my pathetic little system.

DISCLAIMER: I don't believe in exotic cables any more than any of you do. I work at a BB and buy the AR cables. Did somebody say EMPLOYEE DISCOUNT! :-D

No one is asking for 'perfection.' Yet, another misperception.

DBT is used to find out if in your system a component sound the same or sounds different.

 

[ebough]

Snake-oil cables are like religion: some people prefer faith to science.

 

[southeastnavy]

Cable can make a difference, how much is open to debate...

Interesting conversation... mostly.

First, cable/interconnects (C/I) can never make a system sound better, they can only prevent it from sounding worse.

C/I does two things, transfers a signal from A > B and damages it. The better the quality of the C/I, the less damage it does.

There are so many things going on electrically in C/I that it's a wonder any signal ever gets to the other end at all -- intrafiber capacitance, dielectric absorption, resistance of the metal itself, EMF induced noise and distortion... There is no doubt that better cable can make a difference. It is quantifiable and measurable.

This is mostly applicable to audio C/I, including speaker wire and any interconnects that use metal conductors.

Smooth metal is better than metal fibers. Air dielectric is better than polyvinyl. Silver is better than copper. Pure surface copper is better than long grain copper. And LGC is better than your standard zip cord or house wire. (Try 10g solid core household electrical wiring as speaker wire and you'll see what I mean. To keep the bass response solid you'll need to also use 14/12g stranded cable as well.)

As for digital cable... What does a microprocessor do when presented with a 4.5v signal? The idea that digital signals can not be distorted is not entirely accurate. It really isn't all or nothing. Processors are looking for 5.0v, but are programmed to try to figure it out if they don't get what they're looking for. Sometimes they make mistakes. If you don't believe me then I suppose you believe that all bank errors are caused by user error...

To speak to the optical cable debacle. Try reading a magazine through your Toslink. Can you do it? If you can't see through it, how good a job will it really do?! Think about it, it is supposed to transmit light. And yes, I have tried this and you can read through high quality optical cables. BTW, if you have the choice, high quality coax digital cables sound better than optical. There are two less conversion processes to go through and the technology has been around longer. (Denon pioneered the world’s first commercially available PCM recorder for regular studio recording in 1972)

As for video cables. Video is a delicate signal. Analog cables are more susceptible to induced distortion than digital cables. There is no perfect shielding. TV tuners will take what they get with analog and try to make a picture out of it. The more noise, the more snow, speckling and artifact you will see. Digital cables help, but again, refer to the graph above. Digital isn't perfect. The better the cable, the less damage done, the better the picture.

Just because a cable is more expensive, doesn't mean it's better. Look and see how it is made and of what it is made. If you are using pure copper video cables then you are doing considerable damage to the signal. Silver is much better for video because of the frequencies involved. Of course, gold connectors are better because silver will oxidize quicker than gold, but the inside of the cable should be air tight. Again, you have an electrical signal at very high frequency traveling down a conductor, thus -- intrafiber capacitance, dielectric absorption, resistance of the metal itself, EMF induced noise and distortion...

As for magnitude of improvement. Well, we are dealing with the most advanced electronic designs ever imagined. It's like comparing world-class athletes. The difference between the world record holder and the five guys who want to be him is 1/100 second. However, the amount of work and effort it takes to be him is a life-time. But, without the right stuff to begin with (genetics) a life-time isn't long enough to get there.

You don't get 2 times the picture/sound for twice the price. You get 2 times the picture/sound for 4 times the price; 3 times for 8, 4 times for 16, and so on. That's why the Focal-JMlabs Grande Utopias cost $80k/pr and the Nova Utopias only $38k/pr...

Just a little something to think about...

 

[jaxvon]

Sir, you sound like a walking advertisement for Audioquest. All of the things you just said sound like the came almost verbaitim from their marketing literature.

 

[southeastnavy]

Advertising vs. truth

Audioquest makes great C/I and I do like them.

The principles of quality A/V are true no matter the brand of equipment. With some years of experience as an electronics technician, I can safely support of the views expressed in my previous post.

But, don't let the facts get in the way of a good story...

 

[Buckle-meister]

¿Had...think?

Incredible! How on earth does one obtain an upside-down question mark?

Regards

 

[jaxvon]

Incredible! How on earth does one obtain an upside-down question mark?

Regards

If you speak Spanish, then you would probably buy a keyboard with the key for it.

Also, Re: Audioquest, I find their claims to be a bunch of BS. I do not doubt the quality of their cables, but their claims and "science" behind their products is all fluff. Nowhere on their site do they specify resistance, capacitance, inductance, or any other quantifiable and important parameter of their cables.

 

[mtrycrafts]

Interesting conversation... mostly.

First, cable/interconnects (C/I) can never make a system sound better, they can only prevent it from sounding worse.

C/I does two things, transfers a signal from A > B and damages it. The better the quality of the C/I, the less damage it does.

There are so many things going on electrically in C/I that it's a wonder any signal ever gets to the other end at all -- intrafiber capacitance, dielectric absorption, resistance of the metal itself, EMF induced noise and distortion... There is no doubt that better cable can make a difference. It is quantifiable and measurable.

This is mostly applicable to audio C/I, including speaker wire and any interconnects that use metal conductors.

Smooth metal is better than metal fibers. Air dielectric is better than polyvinyl. Silver is better than copper. Pure surface copper is better than long grain copper. And LGC is better than your standard zip cord or house wire. (Try 10g solid core household electrical wiring as speaker wire and you'll see what I mean. To keep the bass response solid you'll need to also use 14/12g stranded cable as well.)

As for digital cable... What does a microprocessor do when presented with a 4.5v signal? The idea that digital signals can not be distorted is not entirely accurate. It really isn't all or nothing. Processors are looking for 5.0v, but are programmed to try to figure it out if they don't get what they're looking for. Sometimes they make mistakes. If you don't believe me then I suppose you believe that all bank errors are caused by user error...

To speak to the optical cable debacle. Try reading a magazine through your Toslink. Can you do it? If you can't see through it, how good a job will it really do?! Think about it, it is supposed to transmit light. And yes, I have tried this and you can read through high quality optical cables. BTW, if you have the choice, high quality coax digital cables sound better than optical. There are two less conversion processes to go through and the technology has been around longer. (Denon pioneered the world’s first commercially available PCM recorder for regular studio recording in 1972)

As for video cables. Video is a delicate signal. Analog cables are more susceptible to induced distortion than digital cables. There is no perfect shielding. TV tuners will take what they get with analog and try to make a picture out of it. The more noise, the more snow, speckling and artifact you will see. Digital cables help, but again, refer to the graph above. Digital isn't perfect. The better the cable, the less damage done, the better the picture.

Just because a cable is more expensive, doesn't mean it's better. Look and see how it is made and of what it is made. If you are using pure copper video cables then you are doing considerable damage to the signal. Silver is much better for video because of the frequencies involved. Of course, gold connectors are better because silver will oxidize quicker than gold, but the inside of the cable should be air tight. Again, you have an electrical signal at very high frequency traveling down a conductor, thus -- intrafiber capacitance, dielectric absorption, resistance of the metal itself, EMF induced noise and distortion...

As for magnitude of improvement. Well, we are dealing with the most advanced electronic designs ever imagined. It's like comparing world-class athletes. The difference between the world record holder and the five guys who want to be him is 1/100 second. However, the amount of work and effort it takes to be him is a life-time. But, without the right stuff to begin with (genetics) a life-time isn't long enough to get there.

You don't get 2 times the picture/sound for twice the price. You get 2 times the picture/sound for 4 times the price; 3 times for 8, 4 times for 16, and so on. That's why the Focal-JMlabs Grande Utopias cost $80k/pr and the Nova Utopias only $38k/pr...

Just a little something to think about...

Then, you can also compare cables by sound, or image, BUT, it must be under DBT. But then you would not have such evidence would you? After all, one cable can be measured to be different because it is 1" longer than the other. Can you hear it????


Those cables you posted, can they be demonstrated to be audibly different from less expensive brand X cables??? It is about evidence, after all, not claims.

 

[mtrycrafts]

Audioquest makes great C/I and I do like them.

The principles of quality A/V are true no matter the brand of equipment. With some years of experience as an electronics technician, I can safely support of the views expressed in my previous post.

But, don't let the facts get in the way of a good story...

Yes, don't let the facts get in your way either. I bet you don't have real evidence to support audible differences of cables, do you? After all, not everything that can be measured is audible and everything you can hear is measurable. Data please.

 

[MDS]

As for digital cable... What does a microprocessor do when presented with a 4.5v signal? The idea that digital signals can not be distorted is not entirely accurate. It really isn't all or nothing. Processors are looking for 5.0v, but are programmed to try to figure it out if they don't get what they're looking for. Sometimes they make mistakes. If you don't believe me then I suppose you believe that all bank errors are caused by user error...

That's a pretty interesting take on things - totally inaccurate, but interesting nonetheless.

 

[jaxvon]

MDS, WmAx, and all, here's some entertainment. I'm not sure whether you'll laugh incredibly hard, or have a heart attack. So this is a warning

http://www.audioquest.com/pdfs/aq_cable_theory.pdf