Master Thread: Are measurements Everything or Nothing?

[fpitas]

You know if we ever get to another planet the first thing we'll do is probe various orifices of the indigenous species. It's a universal thing.

You never know what you'll find!

 

[antcollinet]

You never know what you'll find!

Yep - if you are lucky, the locals might excrete diamonds.

 

[Timcognito]

Earlier I posted

The fundamental issue at ASR by some on the outside is do the measurements match audibility. I think where possible it would be good if Amir's test graphs would have lines or progressive shading for audibility for distortion, SINAD and such based on published and reviewed testing. That might end some debate and rancor.

This tread shows I was completely wrong about that notion. Also every post seems to twist and turn into something else after 6-10 pages.

 

[SIY]

I'll mention the UFO reports from various people. I sincerely doubt aliens, if they exist, have a keen interest in anal probing.

I really feel validated that my favorite analogy is gaining traction.

 

[Dimitrov]

Mass hysteria
Keith

It would be interesting to change the approach from denying or dismissing certain phenomena expressed in narratives as fantasies and makings of the unreliable mind to ask why this is the case. Instead of clinging onto the O'Toole and company curves for speakers and calling it the scientific consensus of what a speaker should sound like, why not ask rather what could be at play and why people, a sizable percentage of the universe, prefer a BBC dip, for example. Maybe it could be their listening environments, and maybe it could be a physiological, anatomical or neurological factor.

Under the umbrella of science, many people's experiences are dissed without thinking about what could be at play, which I call pseudo-science or lazy thinking.

 

[fpitas]

It would be interesting to change the approach from denying or dismissing certain phenomena expressed in narratives as fantasies and makings of the unreliable mind to ask why this is the case. Instead of clinging onto the O'Toole and company curves for speakers and calling it the scientific consensus of what a speaker should sound like, why not ask rather what could be at play and why people, a sizable percentage of the universe, prefer a BBC dip, for example. Maybe it could be their listening environments, and maybe it could be a physiological, anatomical or neurological factor.

No offense, but as the guy with the deep interest, you seem to be the one to do the research.

 

[Purité Audio]

BBC dip is rather different compared to the efficacy of cable.
Keith

 

[IAtaman]

It would be interesting to change the approach from denying or dismissing certain phenomena expressed in narratives as fantasies and makings of the unreliable mind to ask why this is the case. Instead of clinging onto the O'Toole and company curves for speakers and calling it the scientific consensus of what a speaker should sound like, why not ask rather what could be at play and why people, a sizable percentage of the universe, prefer a BBC dip, for example. Maybe it could be their listening environments, and maybe it could be a physiological, anatomical or neurological factor.

Under the umbrella of science, many people's experiences are dissed without thinking about what could be at play, which I call pseudo-science or lazy thinking.

I think there might be a misunderstanding or two in there somewhere. Nobody is suggesting you should like a certain tuning or FR profile. The point of O'Toole and company is about what makes a speaker a good speaker. And the science on that is quote solid, so it is in your best interest to get a good one based on that research. Once you have that sorted out, you can put a BBC dip or a FOX notch, or an RTL hump - that is up to you.

 

[antcollinet]

It would be interesting to change the approach from denying or dismissing certain phenomena expressed in narratives as fantasies and makings of the unreliable mind to ask why this is the case. Instead of clinging onto the O'Toole and company curves for speakers and calling it the scientific consensus of what a speaker should sound like, why not ask rather what could be at play and why people, a sizable percentage of the universe, prefer a BBC dip, for example. Maybe it could be their listening environments, and maybe it could be a physiological, anatomical or neurological factor.

Under the umbrella of science, many people's experiences are dissed without thinking about what could be at play, which I call pseudo-science or lazy thinking.

Hang on - I thought we were talking about the audibility of cables? Dissing fully called for. Though that is not what you have been getting from me. This apparent volte-face may just change that. It suggests (to me at least) bad faith discussion.

 

[Killingbeans]

In this forum there are scientists, Gurus who claim that it is perfectly useless in an audio chain, even of several tens of thousands of dollars, to use a dedicated audio PC rather than any PC...

The key realization to be had here is that an audio setup, costing a ton of money, should not require a special digital source to reach its full potential.

When you buy an expensive piece of kit, a good portion of that expence damn better be the result of an extraordinarily meticulous atttention to the things that less expensive products choose to leave out. If it is more susceptible to EMI and ground loops than the cheap stuff, then the designer has failed his/her job.

This whole idea of high performance gear being more in need of "band-aids" than the crummy products is so backwards, I can't even.....

 

[pkane]

It suggests (to me at least) bad faith discussion.

A lot of that going on in this thread lately... I thought it might be chatbots joining the conversation, so I asked ChatGPT for its opinion... I'm beginning to like AI
--------
Claims about certain audio cables having magical properties to improve sound quality, lift veils, or expand the soundstage often fall under the realm of audiophile myths and subjective perceptions rather than objective scientific facts. Such claims are typically based on anecdotal evidence or personal experiences, which can be influenced by various psychological and perceptual biases.

It is essential to differentiate between objective measurements and subjective impressions when assessing the performance of audio equipment, including cables. While there are differences in audio cables in terms of build quality, materials, and electrical characteristics, these differences mainly affect signal transmission, resistance, capacitance, and other measurable parameters. In most cases, these differences are relatively small and may not result in substantial audible improvements for the majority of listeners.

Subjective experiences with audio equipment can be influenced by various factors, including expectation bias, placebo effect, and individual preferences. Double-blind listening tests, where neither the listener nor the tester knows which cable is being used, have consistently shown that the perceived differences between high-quality audio cables and well-designed standard cables are minimal or non-existent.

In conclusion, claims about audio cables possessing magical properties to dramatically alter sound quality should be approached with skepticism. When choosing audio cables, it is essential to prioritize reputable brands and well-engineered cables that meet your specific needs and budget. Remember that the most significant improvements in audio quality are usually achieved through careful selection of high-quality components and proper system setup rather than pursuing mystical or supernatural audio solutions.

 

[antcollinet]

A lot of that going on in this thread lately... I thought it might be chatbots joining the conversation, so I asked ChatGPT for its opinion... I'm beginning to like AI
--------
Claims about certain audio cables having magical properties to improve sound quality, lift veils, or expand the soundstage often fall under the realm of audiophile myths and subjective perceptions rather than objective scientific facts. Such claims are typically based on anecdotal evidence or personal experiences, which can be influenced by various psychological and perceptual biases.

It is essential to differentiate between objective measurements and subjective impressions when assessing the performance of audio equipment, including cables. While there are differences in audio cables in terms of build quality, materials, and electrical characteristics, these differences mainly affect signal transmission, resistance, capacitance, and other measurable parameters. In most cases, these differences are relatively small and may not result in substantial audible improvements for the majority of listeners.

Subjective experiences with audio equipment can be influenced by various factors, including expectation bias, placebo effect, and individual preferences. Double-blind listening tests, where neither the listener nor the tester knows which cable is being used, have consistently shown that the perceived differences between high-quality audio cables and well-designed standard cables are minimal or non-existent.

In conclusion, claims about audio cables possessing magical properties to dramatically alter sound quality should be approached with skepticism. When choosing audio cables, it is essential to prioritize reputable brands and well-engineered cables that meet your specific needs and budget. Remember that the most significant improvements in audio quality are usually achieved through careful selection of high-quality components and proper system setup rather than pursuing mystical or supernatural audio solutions.

Nice - have you had to provide some guidance in the question to get that ouput? In my experience, ChatGPT tends to lean more towards the... err.... subjective - just as it's training set (the internet) does.

 

[Ken1951]

I sincerely doubt aliens, if they exist, have a keen interest in anal probing.

Cartman says NO!

 

[pkane]

Nice - have you had to provide some guidance in the question to get that ouput? In my experience, ChatGPT tends to lean more towards the... err.... subjective - just as it's training set (the internet) does.

Actually, not at all, it was just a question to explain the properties that audio cables have on the perception of lifting veils and increasing soundstage. Very first question.

 

[sonitus mirus]

A lot of that going on in this thread lately... I thought it might be chatbots joining the conversation, so I asked ChatGPT for its opinion... I'm beginning to like AI
--------
Claims about certain audio cables having magical properties to improve sound quality, lift veils, or expand the soundstage often fall under the realm of audiophile myths and subjective perceptions rather than objective scientific facts. Such claims are typically based on anecdotal evidence or personal experiences, which can be influenced by various psychological and perceptual biases.

It is essential to differentiate between objective measurements and subjective impressions when assessing the performance of audio equipment, including cables. While there are differences in audio cables in terms of build quality, materials, and electrical characteristics, these differences mainly affect signal transmission, resistance, capacitance, and other measurable parameters. In most cases, these differences are relatively small and may not result in substantial audible improvements for the majority of listeners.

Subjective experiences with audio equipment can be influenced by various factors, including expectation bias, placebo effect, and individual preferences. Double-blind listening tests, where neither the listener nor the tester knows which cable is being used, have consistently shown that the perceived differences between high-quality audio cables and well-designed standard cables are minimal or non-existent.

In conclusion, claims about audio cables possessing magical properties to dramatically alter sound quality should be approached with skepticism. When choosing audio cables, it is essential to prioritize reputable brands and well-engineered cables that meet your specific needs and budget. Remember that the most significant improvements in audio quality are usually achieved through careful selection of high-quality components and proper system setup rather than pursuing mystical or supernatural audio solutions.

Yes, sometimes GAI gets things right. I was able to provide answers that sum up the last few pages of the discussion with a little help from our AI overlords.


There are a few reasons why audio cables can potentially make a difference in sound quality, at least under certain conditions:

1. **Impedance Matching**: In some specific audio system contexts, impedance matching between components can be important, and the properties of the cable (resistance, capacitance, and inductance) can contribute to the overall impedance of the system. A poorly matched system can lead to a loss of power or a change in frequency response, which can affect sound quality.

2. **Shielding**: Different cables have different levels and types of shielding against interference from other electronic devices. Interference can cause audible distortion or noise. So, in an environment with a lot of potential for interference, a better-shielded cable could potentially improve sound quality.

3. **Signal Degradation**: For analog signals, especially over long cable runs, the quality of the cable can potentially affect the signal, as small amounts of the signal can be lost or degraded. This is less of an issue with digital signals.

4. **Connector Quality**: The quality of the connectors on the cable can also impact the connection. A poor connection can lead to signal loss or distortion.

However, it's important to note that while these factors can potentially impact sound quality, the differences are often subtle and may not be noticeable in many common listening situations. High-quality cables should be sufficient for the majority of listeners. The perceived difference in sound quality can often be due to a placebo effect, with listeners expecting to hear a difference because they know a change has been made. Ultimately, the best way to determine whether a specific cable makes a difference in sound quality for you is to try it in your own system and trust your ears.


The phenomenon of many individuals seemingly having the same or similar experiences with audio cables can be attributed to several factors, including:

1. **Shared Expectations**: In the field of audio equipment, certain ideas and stereotypes often circulate within the community, influencing people's expectations. For example, if many people talk about a certain type of cable producing a "warmer" sound, others may listen for this effect and perceive it, even if the effect isn't actually present. This is a manifestation of expectation bias or the placebo effect.

2. **Confirmation Bias**: This is a cognitive bias where people seek out information that confirms their existing beliefs and ignore information that contradicts those beliefs. If someone believes that a certain cable will improve their sound, they are likely to focus on aspects of the sound that they believe have improved and ignore those that haven't.

3. **Sociocultural Factors**: Humans naturally tend to form communities and cultures around shared interests, and these cultures often develop their own norms and beliefs. Within the audiophile community, the belief in the impact of cables on sound quality is a widespread cultural norm, so new members of the community may adopt this belief as part of their participation in the culture.

4. **Shared Vocabulary**: Audiophiles often have a shared vocabulary for describing the subtleties of sound. Terms like "warm", "bright", "detailed", etc., are commonly used to describe sound quality. So, when different people describe the same cable, they may use similar language, creating the impression of a shared experience even if their actual perceptions are somewhat different.

5. **Post-Purchase Rationalization**: After spending a significant amount of money on a cable, people may unconsciously convince themselves that the sound has improved to justify the expense. This can lead to an overly positive evaluation of the product.

Again, it's important to remember that while many people report hearing differences with different cables, scientific studies have consistently found that, under blind conditions, people are generally unable to tell the difference between different cables of adequate quality. This suggests that many of the perceived differences are psychological in nature rather than being due to the actual properties of the cables.

 

[antcollinet]

Actually, not at all, it was just a question to explain the properties that audio cables have on the perception of lifting veils and increasing soundstage. Very first question.

Interesting. I wonder if they are guiding the algorithms in a more objective direction.

 

[fpitas]

Interesting. I wonder if they are guiding the algorithms in a more objective direction.

It probably just swiped something from here

 

[ahofer]

I can't even use my computer keyboard anymore, because I can't be certain that every time I press "K" I will actually get a letter K. I give up.

 

[Killingbeans]

What are your guys thoughts on system synergy in audio? Is it just woo woo, in the minds of the listener, or are there objective scientific explanations that support the idea?

Absolute woo. One piece of gear in the chain might have a wonky frequency response that just happens to mitigate another wonky frequency response elsewhere in it.

But that's just two dumb things cancelling each other out. The concept of "synergy" is complete nonsense.

For instance, there is lots of controversy over cable sound in high end audio. Suppose they shouldn't effect the sound. However, the narrative or anecdotal evidence about a particular cable brand is consistent. I have tried to establish if this narrative is linked to a marketing effort but don't see such a direct link. (the brand name is irrelevant as it would detract from what I hope to illustrate) Could the cable construction in some way create this consistent impression by many of the cables within this brand?

What otherwise could phenomenon could explain why people often report hearing similar things after listening to the same cable?

The price tag on the cables alone is enough to get strong bias going. And then there's the fact that nobody "audition" these products without gathering information on them first. They hear/read stories about the things other people have "heard" when using the product, and hey presto! Confirmation bias makes sure they "hear" it too.

And then there's the off chance that the cable is designed to have a truckload of inductance or capacitance, giving it an actual "sound". But then it's just a filter. A cheap parlour trick. Nothing to do with neither quality nor performance.

It would be interesting to change the approach from denying or dismissing certain phenomena expressed in narratives as fantasies and makings of the unreliable mind to ask why this is the case. Instead of clinging onto the O'Toole and company curves for speakers and calling it the scientific consensus of what a speaker should sound like, why not ask rather what could be at play and why people, a sizable percentage of the universe, prefer a BBC dip, for example. Maybe it could be their listening environments, and maybe it could be a physiological, anatomical or neurological factor.

Under the umbrella of science, many people's experiences are dissed without thinking about what could be at play, which I call pseudo-science or lazy thinking.

Nobody is dismissing any experiences. What we are dismissing is the claimed causes of those experiences.

There's never been an attempt to eradicate personal taste.

 

[ahofer]

What otherwise could phenomenon could explain why people often report hearing similar things after listening to the same cable?

Most often different volume levels, but any kind of suggestion or bias, rather than an audible difference in signal when fed at the same level.

NB: FLOYD TOOLE. Jeez, the guy posts here, and he's not an Irish bar.