Stereophile and Audio Cables

[Chrispy]

Fair enough. We all got opinions. I like Herb's speaker reviews.



Personally I think JA deserves some more credit than that. He has produced more speaker measurements than probably anyone else - they are referenced on this site all the time. He does his best to elucidate or diagnose possible issues in measurements of speakers, amps etc. You can read the subjective review if you want, or skip it, and JA will put out the measurements warts and all, and he doesn't hide the warts generally.

I understand that much of the good work JA has done over the years might be dismissed by some people as JA doesn't pass the purity tests of ASR. This place can be fairly tribal sometimes.

If it were more JA oriented I could perhaps agree but with the editorial/staffing decisions he's not quite in that position.....and the rest of them are far more laughable in so many ways.

 

[DLS79]

I understand that much of the good work JA has done over the years might be dismissed by some people as JA doesn't pass the purity tests of ASR. This place can be fairly tribal sometimes.

Yes people can be tribal, but you can also do sever damage to your professional reputation & credibility, when you provide justifications like he did in the comments!

 

[MattHooper]

If it were more JA oriented I could perhaps agree but with the editorial/staffing decisions he's not quite in that position.....and the rest of them are far more laughable in so many ways.

Ok, I can see what you mean. Thanks.

 

[rdenney]

I generally agree with that assessment.

It reminds me very much of R***lig**s Apologists, who do the same work for their devotees.

One reason I started the thread was that my reading-between-the-lines of Stereophile's cable history gave me the hunch that JA wasn't really a "cable guy," so it was interesting to see him produce a defence for the prospect of cables sounding different.

No. Religion is supposed to directed to the metaphysical; physics, electronics, audio, and even music not so. Please don’t attempt that analogy.

Rick “suspecting JA isn’t yet ready to retire” Denney

 

[Zapper]

I thought perhaps we might also see some more direct explanations as to why Atkinson's points were wrong or implausible. But mostly it's been dismissed.

Atkinson presented no facts or data. It was all conjecture and hypotheticals. Surely he has the technical ability to do so if he chose to. But as I mentioned previously, you shouldn't mistake his discussion for an effort to discover the truth, even if he invokes the language of science and engineering. He is providing rationalizations and justifications that help the converted believe the absurd. His is an intrinsically duplicitous argument, and there is no point in engaging with it.

 

[MattHooper]

No. Religion is supposed to directed to the metaphysical; physics, electronics, audio, and even music not so. Please don’t attempt that analogy.

It's a perfectly apt analogy.

I've had as much or more experience with religious apologists as I have with golden eared audiophiles and their defenders.

The arguments promulgated by R*ligious Apologists, especially in debates, are less about trying to convince unbelievers and more about comforting the flock that there are perfectly rational defences for what they believe.

That's why there is an apt parallel to what Zapper wrote about JA showing up to provide sophisticated sounding defences for the irrational beliefs in cables and tweaks:


"The purpose is to give believers a framework to rationalize their beliefs."


(And btw the claims of R*ligious apologists often aren't contained to metaphysics; they often defend purported dubious historical facts, contradicting and challenging accepted science, etc).

/end references to r*ligion

Rick “suspecting JA isn’t yet ready to retire” Denney

I hope he doesn't yet. I think his contribution to stereophile remains really valuable.

 

[Zapper]

A PhD gives you expertise in the area covered in the PhD curriculum, but makes you no more knowledgeable than anyone else in areas outside of the matter covered in the PhD program.

I beg to differ. I learned a lot about plumbing and rodent extermination in my 5 years working in a basement laser lab!

 

[MattHooper]

Atkinson presented no facts or data. It was all conjecture and hypotheticals. Surely he has the technical ability to do so if he chose to. But as I mentioned previously, you shouldn't mistake his discussion for an effort to discover the truth, even if he invokes the language of science and engineering. He is providing rationalizations and justifications that help the converted believe the absurd. His is an intrinsically duplicitous argument, and there is no point in engaging with it.

Here's where we'd disagree I guess.

First, it is intuitive to attribute duplicity to views we hold to be unreasonable, especially if we think the person "clearly must know better." Folks on a science-based forum should be, I hope, aware that's not how human beings work. People really can honestly hold beliefs you think are nuts or unreasonable, even if they "should know better."

I think that, JA being a registered ASR member, and as someone who has produced so much valuable work in the industry - I mean just look how often ASR is referencing Stereophile measurements when discussing or dissing products - not to mention he conducts himself with class here even though often dissed, that, well personally I would prefer to be more charitable and take his arguments as good faith.

I don't think anyone HAS to lift a finger to rebut what JA wrote. But there is the attitude mostly in this thread to just dismiss it as "we all know it's nonsense so why bother?" whereas it would seem more fruitful perhaps to actually address the claims. After all plenty of people may be watching threads like this who DON'T know why JA's claims would be dubious or wrong. I'm one of them btw. (Not that I believe in high end cabling, but I also don't have enough knowledge to express exactly why JA's claims would be incorrect).

Again, nobody has to lift a finger if they don't want to. But perhaps an opportunity is missed in going through his 6 points and quickly mentioning why they are unlikely to account for audible differences in cables?

 

[Short38]

particular note, as the attention on the cables is concentrated only on the external ones.

In fact, inside devices and speakers, we talk about millimeters of diameter, insulation only with rubber and no exotic materials...

then between devices, we move on to noble materials, centimeters of diameter and multiple layers of insulation...

without asking too many questions , this should already raise serious doubts….

Smartest take on cables I have read. When assembling various speakers I am always amazed by that tiny strand of wire from the terminals to the voice coil and then the bizarre melange of materials associated with expensive speaker cables and binding posts.

 

[DLS79]

I don't think anyone HAS to lift a finger to rebut what JA wrote. But there is the attitude mostly in this thread to just dismiss it as "we all know it's nonsense so why bother?" whereas it would seem more fruitful perhaps to actually address the claims. After all plenty of people may be watching threads like this who DON'T know why JA's claims would be dubious or wrong.

I addressed one of his claims/references directly here.

Stereophile and Audio Cables

For anyone interested, I have prepared test files for the ABX test with 2 audio cables that are as dissimilar as they could be. https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/can-you-hear-a-difference-between-audio-cables-abx-test.53012/ Mardis's experiment with the potato is still...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[MattHooper]

my god, some of the arguments in the comments section are nonsensical! Specially the car references by the "I have a PhD in Physics" guy!

I couldn't help myself and just posted a response to the PhD, wondering why he's taken such a non-scientific approach to believing in the effects of high end cables.

It's always fascinating to see scientists defend getting non-sciency when it comes to defending their less rational pet hobby beliefs.

 

[MattHooper]

I addressed one of his claims/references directly here.

Stereophile and Audio Cables

For anyone interested, I have prepared test files for the ABX test with 2 audio cables that are as dissimilar as they could be. https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/can-you-hear-a-difference-between-audio-cables-abx-test.53012/ Mardis's experiment with the potato is still...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Saw it. Well done. Thanks!

 

[Dimitri]

I hate to brag, but I recently bought a 6 pack of 1.2 foot balanced cables for $32

Show-off!

Plenty of people have felt it worth responding.

Most people would not let such a review stand unchallenged - I don't mistake their compulsion to react negatively to phrases like below

"Before I seriously engage with any cable product, I need to know that it is thin, compliant, and gentle on my components' rear panels. If it lays neatly and does not attract dust bunnies, I fall in love. "

with "thread value".

Pardon the harshness of the written tone.
I'm no audio magazine reviewer and I'm also typing all this on a non-color corrected monitor to boot!

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

Yes people can be tribal, but you can also do sever damage to your professional reputation & credibility, when you provide justifications like he did in the comments!

Seems to me that because of the tribalism anyone’s reputation and credibility will be damaged in the eyes of at least one tribe no matter what.

 

[Zapper]

But there is the attitude mostly in this thread to just dismiss it as "we all know it's nonsense so why bother?" whereas it would seem more fruitful perhaps to actually address the claims.

I think JA's claims have some degree of plausibility to them. I am not dismissing them as nonsense, I am saying they are serving as justification for other nonsense, such as the subjective review you linked to.

I would be interested in seeing any measurements that he may have that support his conjectures. I have seen some measurements on cables that indicate differences large enough so they could potentially be audible - however, the quality of the data was poor and there was inadequate description of test methods and conditions, as well as basic information such as length of cables, for the data to be usable. I have also seen descriptions of blind listening tests where audible differences were identified, again with inadequate supporting information.

JA is equipped to provide much higher quality data, if he chose to do so. But he hasn't. In the absence of evidence, the null hypothesis prevails.

But perhaps an opportunity is missed in going through his 6 points and quickly mentioning why they are unlikely to account for audible differences in cables?

If we want to match conjecture with counter-conjecture, here's a quick effort:
1) Optimum conductor diameter: Possibly true mathematically, most likely insignificant practically.
2) Dielectric nonlinearity. It's a real effect. It can matter in capacitors. Does it ever matter in cables? Unlikely, because the capacitive current is a small shunt current on a low impedance source. An IM distortion measurement would tell. JA has an audio analyzer and could do that measurement.
3) Mechanical structure of conductor. Microstructure does alter resistance. But so do many other things. In the end it's just resistance, regardless of the cause.
4) Grounding problems, loading of unterminated cable effect on negative feedback. Grounding problems are real, not sure what his point is. Signals propagate in an unterminated cable through a series of reflections, stair stepping their way to the final value. That would matter in an microwave amplifier. But audio frequencies are so low and the cable distances so short, it is completely invisible. The cable looks like a lumped capacitance and resistance, with no special effect on a feedback amplifier.
5) RF shielding. Yes, RF shielding can matter, and it can be measured. There are many standard test methods for RFI.
6) Microphonics. Yes, it exists, and it can be measured.

So we have a number of conjectures with a physical basis that are measurable. I eagerly await the data from those who claim these effects are audible.

 

[Purité Audio]

Why don’t Stereophile just sack those old duffers?
Keith

 

[Audiofire]

Why don’t Stereophile just sack those old duffers?
Keith

Circle of Collusion?

 

[Svet Angelov]

Why don’t Stereophile just sack those old duffers?
Keith

" Da mystery of fence-sittin' "

 

[Overseas]

Once you work outside of those control, monsters flourish. Anything seems to happen. All the nonsensical, woo-woo, pseudoscientific nonsense in the world is what happens when you are speculating outside of scientific method and controls. Every single person is susceptible no matter how well trained: that's why controlling for bias is built in to the method.

To make an argument, but not being trained in sciences, say I do not have a problem with that. But.. how do the manufacturers control the process, the secret sauce, because it has to be repetitive and successful as a product, right? Telling me that in 2024 Tellurium, say, have an absolute technical secret better kept than Pentagon or what.

 

[Overseas]

Fair enough. We all got opinions. I like Herb's speaker reviews.



Personally I think JA deserves some more credit than that. He has produced more speaker measurements than probably anyone else - they are referenced on this site all the time. He does his best to elucidate or diagnose possible issues in measurements of speakers, amps etc. You can read the subjective review if you want, or skip it, and JA will put out the measurements warts and all, and he doesn't hide the warts generally.

I understand that much of the good work JA has done over the years might be dismissed by some people as JA doesn't pass the purity tests of ASR. This place can be fairly tribal sometimes.

Look, I understand shit from measurements. But I noticed Stereophile rather reviews exclusive brands with big big big budgets. Failing to conclude that some 10k device does the same technical thing as a 500 bucks device is a big big big white lie. Many non technical music lovers may have paid all their savings for an exotic brand reviewed by Stereophile, because the polished high end reviewer was not honest enough to give a fair conclusion comparative to good, well built systems.