The same problem as always, because it depends on the devices involved and on the listeners.
I have stated it quite often in other threads, the variability among listeners is (means "can be") large; see for example - although not so much related to fine details - the discussion between members listening through the room even below "Schroeder" and other members expressing their disbelief.
There simply is no objective gamut for importance/relevance of sonic properties to individuals.
That might be true or not, but i was talking up to now about the physical foundations that should be not neglected when talking about cables.
Again, that might be true or not, which way could i evaluate it? There is no data given and how could i evaluate even further conclusions about all other permutations of equipment and listeners?
The argument seems to rely on the "weak auditory memory myth" , there is again no data available; although i´ve read hundreds of papers on auditory memory research i´m not aware of experiments that examine the question what degree of a difference (and what kind of difference) is associated with impossibility for transfer to longer lasting storage.
Like me? Could you please specify where i relied on "unsubstatiated conjecture about mysterious things beyond any known science" ??
At a first glance it seems to me that you now resort to the eristic bag of tricks - what the Wombats and SIYs never fail to do, when unaible to provide substantial arguments - but i´ll give you the benefit of doubt. Might be misunderstanding or misinterpretation?!
Although i don´t know what "boutique" in this regard should mean, i´ll use the term and to state that the "boutique" satellite manufacturer don´t invest in this kind of "heavy equipment" but what´s the point?
The "boutique" satellite manufactuerers outsource the production of speciality cable not to the numerous bulk wire makers but to the not so numerous (mainly small) manufacturers able to produce what they need, and so does anybody who needs special cables.
We were discussing for example effects related to triboelectricity and the need for low capacitance cables in case where the input capacitance of the amplifiers is already a bit on the high side.
I hope we don´t need to discuss why from an EE point of view a balanced shielded twisted pair (shield only connected at the amplifier input side) is a good choice?!
Again, as you might remember i was the only one in this thread who provided some actual data from experimental research related to triboelectricity. If you can´t accept that it is obviously related to knowledge of physical properties and quality appreciation i´m puzzled but don´t know what to add further.
The same holds true for the capacitance issue and the advantage of a twisted shielded pair, that the relevance of all this depends on the environment in which the components are placed should be obvious; if no external (possibly interfering) fields are existent, it doesn´t matter if you follow good engineering practice.
At that point we obviously agree; but it´s a bit dangerous as the underlying principle means that the person who states something as fact should be able to provide evidence.
Plausibility, strong belief or the like are not sufficient.
So please be careful in stating as a fact that something exist only in somebody´s head.....
Which seams to be more a belief (the "speak volumes" part) .
Ask yourself, maybe some "boutique" cable seller could offer evidence for the audiblity due to a questionable effect. Would it really help in selling the cable?
Imo there isn´t much evidence that in luxury markets evidence is important for success.
