oh dear... "Cable Pathways Between Audio Components Can Affect Perceived Sound Quality"

[Wes]

Cable pathways? They must have traversed the Twilight Zone,

I agree the article's title (not to mention a lot of other text) is poorly chosen.

It should have been Cable Stairways to Heaven: A Test of Something or Other

- the colon is important as it's been shown that journal articles with a : in them are cited more often

 

[DimitryZ]

I will offer several functionality identical "toy" experiments that will attempt to demonstrate there is no issue here - beyond a pick of a peculiar pathways pairing to maximize audibility.

Everyone should understand that unlike ASTM, medical and IEEE standards, perceptual test protocols are purposefully flexible. There are many test models and methodologies.

Let's imagine that a wine researcher decided to test a hypothesis that very differently tasting wines, paired with custom Riedel stemware (designed to bring out the essential qualities of each grape) can be easily recognized by non-oenophile with bare minimum of training. The wine/glass combination is a wine pathway.

The experiment is structured around blind A/B identification, with the glass shape concealed by an identical black cardboard tube, making glass shape identification impossible. The two glasses are even weigh-matched.

The experimentor chooses very different wines - a lush and wood-aged California chardonnay and an ultra dry French Sancere. In order to maximize his potential for success, he teaches his subject to look for distinguish qualities in each wine - a buttery taste and woody finish in one wine and a minerally flavor with a clean finish on the other.

Armed with this quick training and the enhancing qualities of the stemware, his subject group scores a perfect score in 50 trials.

The researcher is featured on the cover of the Wine Spectator as "The Man Who Broke the 'All Wine Tastes the Same to the Masses' Myth."

 

[SIY]

Let's imagine that a wine researcher decided to test a hypothesis that very differently tasting wines, paired with custom Riedel stemware (designed to bring out the essential qualities of each grape) can be easily recognized by non-oenophile with bare minimum of training. The wine/glass combination is a wine pathway.

The experiment is structured around blind A/B identification, with the glass shape concealed by an identical black cardboard tube, making glass shape identification impossible. The two glasses are even weigh-matched.

The experimentor chooses very different wines - a lush and wood-aged California chardonnay and an ultra dry French Sancere. In order to maximize his potential for success, he teaches his subject to look for distinguish qualities but in each wine - a buttery taste and woody finish in one wine and a minerally flavor with a clean finish on the other.

Armed with this quick training and the enhancing qualities of the stemware, his subject group scores a perfect score in 50 trials.

The researcher is featured on the cover of the Wine Spectator!

Why would he be? Controlled double blind testing is a routine process in professional wine evaluation.

Of course your proposed experiment is a poor way to test your stated hypothesis.

 

[DimitryZ]

Why would he be? Controlled double blind testing is a routine process in professional wine evaluation.

Of course your proposed experiment is a poor way to test your stated hypothesis.

This would be controlled double blind testing, of course.

The system is simply expanded to include stemware, very differently tasting wines chosen and naive participants are lightly trained.

There are zero statistical problems with this.

You are just used to DBTs configured for failure (nothing wrong with that either), instead of for success (also fine).

It all comes down to the test objective.

 

[SIY]

You are just used to DBTs configured for failure (nothing wrong with that either), instead of for success (also fine).

Bullshit.

 

[DimitryZ]

Bullshit.

That's a strong assessment, which I may not have deserved?

Standard DBTs offer an chance of recignition of difference in an unfamiliar system, in an unfamiliar room, typically with unfamiliar music for very short periods of time with no volume control. The exact opposite of the experience of listening in the home.

For those reasons, they are designed to reduce subjects' aquity, as shown here:

https://hal-institut-mines-telecom....ile/index/docid/842647/filename/APAC_5172.pdf

There is nothing wrong with that - the test objective was formed around an aquity-reducing methodology. However, there is nothing wrong with an opposite approach - an aquity-enhancing methodology.

 

[JustJones]

Your example doesn't match. You have same glass, different wines, this paper has different pathways, different cables. I don't really see how any relevant conclusion can be drawn. XLR sounds different than RCA using cables with different measurements?

 

[SIY]

That's a strong assessment, which I may not have deserved?

Standard DBTs offer an chance of recignition of difference in an unfamiliar system, in an unfamiliar room, typically with unfamiliar music for very short periods of time with no volume control. The exact opposite of the experience of listening in the home.

For those reasons, they are designed to reduce subjects' aquity, as shown here:

https://hal-institut-mines-telecom....ile/index/docid/842647/filename/APAC_5172.pdf

There is nothing wrong with that - the test objective was formed around an aquity-reducing methodology. However, there is nothing wrong with an opposite approach - an aquity-enhancing methodology.

Followed by even more bullshit. Harsh but accurate.

 

[DimitryZ]

Your example doesn't match. You have same glass, different wines, this paper has different pathways, different cables. I don't really see how any relevant conclusion can be drawn. XLR sounds different than RCA using cables with different measurements?

Nope, you are not familiar with Riedel stemware. Every major wine type gets its' own glass shape. In use at wine expos and by serious oenophiles world wide.

Therefore, the wine/glass system is a "wine pathway" - analagous to the analogue pathway used by the AES researcher.

 

[DimitryZ]

Followed by even more bullshit. Harsh but accurate.

I humbly ask that you stay on the polite side. Cursing doesn't enhance the strength of an argument in any way.

 

[JustJones]

True I'm not but why bother weigh matching the glasses? Make the wine test easier use the same white wine in each glass but dye one red and ask for woody, buttery ; mineral , clean.

 

[GDK]

Nope, you are not familiar with Riedel stemware. Every major wine type gets its' own glass shape. In use at wine expos and by serious oenophiles world wide.

Therefore, the wine/glass system is a "wine pathway" - analagous to the analogue pathway used by the AES researcher.

There is actually a standard glass for wine tasting: https://www.iso.org/standard/9002.html

 

[DimitryZ]

True I'm not but why bother weigh matching the glasses? Make the wine test easier use the same white wine in each glass but dye one red and ask for woody, buttery ; mineral , clean.

Sure.

However, as I shown before offering subjective descriptors to a null choice results in a null result. This is definitional in perceptual testing.

Training can only help in AB testing (not ABX) if the choice is real.

 

[DimitryZ]

There is actually a standard glass for wine tasting: https://www.iso.org/standard/9002.html

Yes, but it can't enhance subjects' aquity. Fine for a professional, but lacking for the novice. Specialty stemware enhances wine differences.

If your test objective is to demonstrate a difference, it is a perfectly valid tool to use. And beautiful, too. Also more affordable than crazy price cables - and actually delivers.

 

[SIY]

I humbly ask that you stay on the polite side. Cursing doesn't enhance the strength of an argument in any way.

Then stop spreading bullshit.

 

[JustJones]

I'm sorry but I fail to see how this experiment informed the average audiophile of anything other than we showed XLR can sound different than RCA using cables that measure different without checking for distortion or noise difference of the pathways. I think I could do that at home.

 

[GDK]

Yes, but it can't enhance subjects' aquity. Fine for a professional, but lacking for the novice. Specialty stemware enhances wine differences.

No, but they certainly allow Riedel to sell a lot more glasses to those novices, as opposed to the “serious oenophiles” that you referred to earlier.

 

[DimitryZ]

I'm sorry but I fail to see how this experiment informed the average audiophile of anything other than we showed XLR can sound different than RCA using cables that measure different without checking for distortion or noise difference of the pathways. I think I could do that at home.

That's excellent!

Though the researcher certainly characterized the cables very well showing they were quite different in measurements.

And it's not at all obvious that XLR and RCA cables sound different in typical short home runs. I expect my Emotiva amps to sound quite identical with similar/identical cables

 

[DimitryZ]

No, but they certainly allow Riedel to sell a lot more glasses to those novices, as opposed to the “serious oenophiles” that you referred to earlier.

No, Riedel is just a well priced brand in this field.

I assure you that custom stemware is de rigueur in serious wine appreciation.

Standard glass is used to level the competition among professionals. Like limits on sports equipment, AC75 America"s Cup design, etc.

 

[GDK]

No, Riedel is just a well priced brand in this field.

I assure you that custom stemware is de rigueur in serious wine appreciation.

Thanks, but I don’t actually need your assurances on this topic, I can assure you.