• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). There are daily reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

GR Research B24 AC Cable Review: Does it Make an Audible Difference?

DSJR

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 27, 2020
Messages
1,929
Likes
2,472
Location
Suffolk Coastal, UK
Some of us have to go through the crap though but yeah, I do hope the young-uns coming into music and speech reproduction via speakers from their often expensive headphone jaunts, will be a bit more savvy than 'we' were ;)
 

balletboy

Active Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2020
Messages
212
Likes
184
We all love what we love :)

I have learnt through this forum and ‘the other place’ that

1) I’ve wasted 000s on expensive gear that has limited bearing on what I hear vs cheaper alternatives

2) I didn’t pay enough attention to my room acoustics early enough

3) It is east to fall into the ‘my cables are constraining by system ‘ trap unless we are educated.

Kudos to Amir and the ASR crew for helping the next generation to enjoy their music without breaking the bank :)
Agree entirely with the first line.

I‘ve spent 000s on expensive gear, whether it has a bearing on what I hear is really no one else’s business, gives me a lot of pleasure and I don’t give a flying banana what anyone else thinks. It’s my money, I can do with it what Iike.

@amirm is epistemilogically joined at the hip with an AP555 machine. I didn’t study a scientific discipline, but one of the professors in the department where I did study was of the view that science was evolutionary. Scientists aim to prove the truth of theories, but you can neither prove nor justify that a theory is true, even if it is, and the truth of any theory, even if true should always be challenged (falsification). It’s the concept of critical realism. An example would be that you can never prove that a cable does not make a difference, even if it doesn’t, but you should try and prove that it can, which may be true. That is how knowledge can evolve. He would have thought that if you know everything about a scientific discipline, like amplifier design, so that you can predict the outcome of any design from knowledge alone is hopelessly deterministic.
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
39,485
Likes
179,720
Location
Seattle Area
@amirm is epistemilogically joined at the hip with an AP555 machine
What are you talking about? At least half of my reviews include listening tests. This review in the specific strongly focused on audible differences. Did you not read or watch it?
 

ExUnoPlura

Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2020
Messages
32
Likes
39
Agree entirely with the first line.

I‘ve spent 000s on expensive gear, whether it has a bearing on what I hear is really no one else’s business, gives me a lot of pleasure and I don’t give a flying banana what anyone else thinks. It’s my money, I can do with it what Iike.

@amirm is epistemilogically joined at the hip with an AP555 machine. I didn’t study a scientific discipline, but one of the professors in the department where I did study was of the view that science was evolutionary. Scientists aim to prove the truth of theories, but you can neither prove nor justify that a theory is true, even if it is, and the truth of any theory, even if true should always be challenged (falsification). It’s the concept of critical realism. An example would be that you can never prove that a cable does not make a difference, even if it doesn’t, but you should try and prove that it can, which may be true. That is how knowledge can evolve. He would have thought that if you know everything about a scientific discipline, like amplifier design, so that you can predict the outcome of any design from knowledge alone is hopelessly deterministic.
You are mixing up a bit of your model of science (of which there are several minor variations). Generally science is seen as an inductive (or abductive) process with hypotheses. There is a bit of an analogy to evolution in that there is change, but evolution is not directed whereas scientists are very directed in their thinking about new hypotheses. Knowledge certainly grows and changes but the notion of determinism has to do with physical processes being completely predictable by their past history. When we have a well-tested theory that is also conformal with other knowledge (there is generally an implication of semantic holism here), then you have a high degree of reliability that your knowledge will result in high quality designs (as predicted). Also, falsification is the notion that a scientific theory has a method for being shown wrong not that it should necessarily be challenged. So a theory that cables of a certain strand type are better than others for protecting against electromagnetic interference can be falsified by a range of exposures and measurements to emag sources. That's an example of a falsification criterion.

Anyway, the only reason for going down this pedantic rabbit hole is that there is sometimes a conflation that the notion that science is not yet complete should make one skeptical about every little thing since it is, well, not yet complete.
 

balletboy

Active Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2020
Messages
212
Likes
184
I assume you studied medicine or English ?
No, we had a Department of Philosophy, Logic and Scientific Method. More half a corridor than a department. The name of my degree has little to do with what I studied. This was quite normal in Social Sciences.
 

beagleman

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Sep 24, 2020
Messages
784
Likes
973
Agree entirely with the first line.

I‘ve spent 000s on expensive gear, whether it has a bearing on what I hear is really no one else’s business, gives me a lot of pleasure and I don’t give a flying banana what anyone else thinks. It’s my money, I can do with it what Iike.

@amirm is epistemilogically joined at the hip with an AP555 machine. I didn’t study a scientific discipline, but one of the professors in the department where I did study was of the view that science was evolutionary. Scientists aim to prove the truth of theories, but you can neither prove nor justify that a theory is true, even if it is, and the truth of any theory, even if true should always be challenged (falsification). It’s the concept of critical realism. An example would be that you can never prove that a cable does not make a difference, even if it doesn’t, but you should try and prove that it can, which may be true. That is how knowledge can evolve. He would have thought that if you know everything about a scientific discipline, like amplifier design, so that you can predict the outcome of any design from knowledge alone is hopelessly deterministic.
Just the fact that you are posting this, means you DO at some level care what others think.

I am fairly well educated, and when someone TRULY does not care, they do not even make mention of stuff like you are doing. If you truly did not care, it would not even be a thought in your mind. Your mention of it is indicative that you do have some issues based on what people think.
 

ROOSKIE

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 27, 2020
Messages
1,448
Likes
2,514
Location
Minneapolis
Just the fact that you are posting this, means you DO at some level care what others think.

I am fairly well educated, and when someone TRULY does not care, they do not even make mention of stuff like you are doing. If you truly did not care, it would not even be a thought in your mind. Your mention of it is indicative that you do have some issues based on what people think.
I agree, his post reads like the rantings of someone struggling to feel free and feel confident and feel good.
Those folks usually include various chatter on about how it was all my choice(feeling free) how I don't care what others think(feeling confident)and how it all gave me pleasure(feeling good).

Agree entirely with the first line.

I‘ve spent 000s on expensive gear, whether it has a bearing on what I hear is really no one else’s business, gives me a lot of pleasure and I don’t give a flying banana what anyone else thinks. It’s my money, I can do with it what Iike.

@amirm is epistemilogically joined at the hip with an AP555 machine. I didn’t study a scientific discipline, but one of the professors in the department where I did study was of the view that science was evolutionary. Scientists aim to prove the truth of theories, but you can neither prove nor justify that a theory is true, even if it is, and the truth of any theory, even if true should always be challenged (falsification). It’s the concept of critical realism. An example would be that you can never prove that a cable does not make a difference, even if it doesn’t, but you should try and prove that it can, which may be true. That is how knowledge can evolve. He would have thought that if you know everything about a scientific discipline, like amplifier design, so that you can predict the outcome of any design from knowledge alone is hopelessly deterministic.
Personally I feel that folks who make $400+ power cables ought to be the ones who prove cables like that make meaningful differences &&& do it before they sell them to other folks.
 

charbong

Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2022
Messages
78
Likes
53
I didn’t study a scientific discipline, but one of the professors in the department where I did study was of the view that science was evolutionary. Scientists aim to prove the truth of theories, but you can neither prove nor justify that a theory is true, even if it is, and the truth of any theory, even if true should always be challenged (falsification).

Thomas Kuhn posited that "the notion of scientific truth, at any given moment, cannot be established solely by objective criteria but is defined by a consensus of a scientific community. Competing paradigms are frequently incommensurable; that is, they are competing and irreconcilable accounts of reality. Thus, our comprehension of science can never rely wholly upon "objectivity" alone. Science must account for subjective perspectives as well, since all objective conclusions are ultimately founded upon the subjective conditioning/worldview of its researchers and participants" (wikipedia).
 

ROOSKIE

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 27, 2020
Messages
1,448
Likes
2,514
Location
Minneapolis
Thomas Kuhn posited that "the notion of scientific truth, at any given moment, cannot be established solely by objective criteria but is defined by a consensus of a scientific community. Competing paradigms are frequently incommensurable; that is, they are competing and irreconcilable accounts of reality. Thus, our comprehension of science can never rely wholly upon "objectivity" alone. Science must account for subjective perspectives as well, since all objective conclusions are ultimately founded upon the subjective conditioning/worldview of its researchers and participants" (wikipedia).
Yes, of course interpreting the data is a subjective task. Even deciding when you have collected enough data to make said determination is a subjective assesment.

Toward this cable- Where is there anything anywhere that is honoring the totality of both the objective and the subjective nature of inquiry, that indicates the cable is good purchase?
 

charbong

Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2022
Messages
78
Likes
53
Where is there anything anywhere that is honoring the totality of both the objective and the subjective nature of inquiry, that indicates the cable is good purchase?

I have not seen it yet. Btw, great line "honoring the totality of both the objective and the subjective nature of inquiry". Want to put that on a t-shirt.
 

balletboy

Active Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2020
Messages
212
Likes
184
You are mixing up a bit of your model of science (of which there are several minor variations). Generally science is seen as an inductive (or abductive) process with hypotheses. There is a bit of an analogy to evolution in that there is change, but evolution is not directed whereas scientists are very directed in their thinking about new hypotheses. Knowledge certainly grows and changes but the notion of determinism has to do with physical processes being completely predictable by their past history. When we have a well-tested theory that is also conformal with other knowledge (there is generally an implication of semantic holism here), then you have a high degree of reliability that your knowledge will result in high quality designs (as predicted). Also, falsification is the notion that a scientific theory has a method for being shown wrong not that it should necessarily be challenged. So a theory that cables of a certain strand type are better than others for protecting against electromagnetic interference can be falsified by a range of exposures and measurements to emag sources. That's an example of a falsification criterion.

Anyway, the only reason for going down this pedantic rabbit hole is that there is sometimes a conflation that the notion that science is not yet complete should make one skeptical about every little thing since it is, well, not yet complete.
Just the fact that you are posting this, means you DO at some level care what others think.

I am fairly well educated, and when someone TRULY does not care, they do not even make mention of stuff like you are doing. If you truly did not care, it would not even be a thought in your mind. Your mention of it is indicative that you do have some issues based on what people think.
The first step to caring would be to say what audio devices I actually use, then people could say what they think of them. After saying I owned Harbeth (which I no longer do) and the response that followed in that thread generally, I decided not to name anything I use and I don’t think I have.
 

balletboy

Active Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2020
Messages
212
Likes
184
You can easily prove it in the case of a power cable. There is no way it could make a difference.
You can measure resistance, capacitance, inductance, frequency response, no doubt other things, you cannot prove comprehensively that a power cable cannot make a difference. Just saying there is "no way" is presumptive. There may be a way, that you either don't know exists or can't examine with your current knowledge of cables. It may be true they can't make a difference, but you can't prove it. You have to be aware that sooner or later someone may come up with a basis for showing that they can make an audible difference.

You may be making the error or assuming that the sum total of your knowledge leads you to know the truth. Good luck with that. In some areas of science "the truth" is everyday experience, in others (some aspects of astrophysics), "the truth" is entirely theoretical, and many astrophysicists half expect their versions of the truth to be disproven.

At the end of the day it's only listening to music, bluetooth headphones do me fine, but people who think they know the truth have a habit of trying to enforce it on others. Just look at the impact of the Religious Right on American politics. That's the Gospel Truth. After all, Newton was considered to have uncovered the truth about gravity, it lasted for 250 years until he was disproven.
 

Dogcoop

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
136
Likes
264
You may be making the error or assuming that the sum total of your knowledge leads you to know the truth. Good luck with that. In some areas of science "the truth" is everyday experience, in others (some aspects of astrophysics), "the truth" is entirely theoretical, and many astrophysicists half expect their versions of the truth to be disproven.
Please show me how the results of a null test are inaccurate or somehow ‘tainted’ by that funny thing the truth?
 

Doodski

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 9, 2019
Messages
14,908
Likes
14,620
Location
Canada
You can measure resistance, capacitance, inductance, frequency response, no doubt other things, you cannot prove comprehensively that a power cable cannot make a difference. Just saying there is "no way" is presumptive. There may be a way, that you either don't know exists or can't examine with your current knowledge of cables. It may be true they can't make a difference, but you can't prove it. You have to be aware that sooner or later someone may come up with a basis for showing that they can make an audible difference.

You may be making the error or assuming that the sum total of your knowledge leads you to know the truth. Good luck with that. In some areas of science "the truth" is everyday experience, in others (some aspects of astrophysics), "the truth" is entirely theoretical, and many astrophysicists half expect their versions of the truth to be disproven.

At the end of the day it's only listening to music, bluetooth headphones do me fine, but people who think they know the truth have a habit of trying to enforce it on others. Just look at the impact of the Religious Right on American politics. That's the Gospel Truth. After all, Newton was considered to have uncovered the truth about gravity, it lasted for 250 years until he was disproven.
What the basis of this belief? Have you a education in the principles of electricity and fundamentals of electronics? It seems like you are just making commentary without any concrete explanation or theory involved.
 

Thomas savage

Grand Contributor
The Watchman
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 24, 2016
Messages
10,224
Likes
16,043
Location
uk, taunton
So, your point is to just knock Amir down a notch, so no one confuses him with Jesus?

Ok, that's enough. You are talking out of your sphincter now.
But has he monetised his sphincter?

Amirm made so much money working ( monetising his sphincter) for good business men at Microsoft he dosnt need to worry about the tragic financial waste land he's frequently walking into since he left the safety of Bills bosom.

It's not all plane sailing for Amirm though, you guys have led him near to financial ruin , he can't even afford a gardener anymore and has to look out onto the over grown mess hopelessly while frantically responding to every Tom Dick and Herbert .

Not to worry though, he can sell all the behavioural data that's been mined through the backdoor, your backdoors and without you knowing !

ASR bought to you by Meta ..
 
Last edited:

balletboy

Active Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2020
Messages
212
Likes
184
No, it's more a philosophical point on scientific method, I certainly did not make it up, it was introduced to me academically and I've read a little over the years. It does have a big impact on how people think about what they know, the difference between knowledge and truth, minor things like that. I have a rather chaotic view of science and the truth. Karl Popper and Arthur Koestler would be my starting points for reading material. Both very remarkable individuals, born 3 years apart in the Austria-Hungarian Empire and ended their days in London.
 

TrevC

Active Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2021
Messages
152
Likes
103
You can measure resistance, capacitance, inductance, frequency response, no doubt other things, you cannot prove comprehensively that a power cable cannot make a difference. Just saying there is "no way" is presumptive. There may be a way, that you either don't know exists or can't examine with your current knowledge of cables. It may be true they can't make a difference, but you can't prove it. You have to be aware that sooner or later someone may come up with a basis for showing that they can make an audible difference.

You may be making the error or assuming that the sum total of your knowledge leads you to know the truth. Good luck with that. In some areas of science "the truth" is everyday experience, in others (some aspects of astrophysics), "the truth" is entirely theoretical, and many astrophysicists half expect their versions of the truth to be disproven.

At the end of the day it's only listening to music, bluetooth headphones do me fine, but people who think they know the truth have a habit of trying to enforce it on others. Just look at the impact of the Religious Right on American politics. That's the Gospel Truth. After all, Newton was considered to have uncovered the truth about gravity, it lasted for 250 years until he was disproven.
As you are a non-technical person you will have to take my word for it!
 

Doodski

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 9, 2019
Messages
14,908
Likes
14,620
Location
Canada
No, it's more a philosophical point on scientific method, I certainly did not make it up, it was introduced to me academically and I've read a little over the years. It does have a big impact on how people think about what they know, the difference between knowledge and truth, minor things like that. I have a rather chaotic view of science and the truth. Karl Popper and Arthur Koestler would be my starting points for reading material. Both very remarkable individuals, born 3 years apart in the Austria-Hungarian Empire and ended their days in London.
I have very little understanding of the philosophical point other than every once in awhile I might say something profound and philosophical...lol. Purely by trial and error and sheer luck. Okies back to power cables.... They can be measured to death and analyzed to death into miniscule bits of facts and details that will indicate exactly what they are about and what their parameters are. I understand for some peeps that this seem outlandish but it's fact.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom