Interesting post.

[earwaxer9]

There ARE audible differences between (some, not all) cables, both speaker & interconnect. Often very subtle, and usually impossible to get a consensus between listeners as to which was 'better'
:-)

Deciding whether a component improves your sound quality and musical enjoyment should be a secondary question--after you have established that you can reliably hear a difference that you can characterize. This is the part of subjective listening where listeners most often disagree.

I liked both of these comments as related to one central point that I think many of us "audiophiles" overlook from time to time (being gracious here, because I really feel like many of us overlook this point entirely): We need to focus on SPECIFICALLY what it is we dont like about our "system" sound, BEFORE we go "fixing" it! Many times we shoot in the dark for a "fix". "I need a new amp", "I need a new DAC", etc, etc. This is wrong. And just as wrong is the idea that we can make "large" fixes with cables.

We need to stay focused on the basics: Harsh sound - look at electronics, crappy wires/connections in the signal path. Lack of depth/soundstage/timber - look at timing/jitter, power and power supply, electronics or tubes, speaker variables (crossovers). Just examples here, and the list of fixes is endless and very individual according to each set up. The important point is that a "warm" tube amp will benefit a "clinical" sounding system that is in other ways very good! Similar logic applies to other components.

All of the above make a "difference" - We, as "audiophiles" appear less "crazy" and ultimately are more satisfied listeners and hobbyists if we take a more focused approach. That doesnt mean we go back to the days of THD! No thanks! Been there done that. I go with the "subjective" approach from discussions like these and reviews from others like myself.

[michael123]

We need to focus on SPECIFICALLY what it is we dont like about our "system" sound, BEFORE we go "fixing" it! Many times we shoot in the dark for a "fix". "I need a new amp", "I need a new DAC", etc, etc. This is wrong. And just as wrong is the idea that we can make "large" fixes with cables.

We need to stay focused on the basics: Harsh sound - look at electronics, crappy wires/connections in the signal path. Lack of depth/soundstage/timber - look at timing/jitter, power and power supply, electronics or tubes, speaker variables (crossovers). Just examples here, and the list of fixes is endless and very individual according to each set up. The important point is that a "warm" tube amp will benefit a "clinical" sounding system that is in other ways very good! Similar logic applies to other components.

All of the above make a "difference" - We, as "audiophiles" appear less "crazy" and ultimately are more satisfied listeners and hobbyists if we take a more focused approach. That doesnt mean we go back to the days of THD! No thanks! Been there done that. I go with the "subjective" approach from discussions like these and reviews from others like myself.

While I favor your approach, and delay as much as I can any willingness to upgrade, the major cause for that is... budget constraints. If I had enough money to get any piece of hardware I need, I would upgrade as soon as I want.

That's fun, I do not see anything wrong with that.. As for any regular girl to buy a pair of new shoes or eyeglasses, even though she has already 10 pairs in the closet.

As far as the hobby does not hurt other parts of our lives - I do not see anything wrong..

[earwaxer9]

While I favor your approach, and delay as much as I can any willingness to upgrade, the major cause for that is... budget constraints. If I had enough money to get any piece of hardware I need, I would upgrade as soon as I want.

That's fun, I do not see anything wrong with that.. As for any regular girl to buy a pair of new shoes or eyeglasses, even though she has already 10 pairs in the closet.

As far as the hobby does not hurt other parts of our lives - I do not see anything wrong..

Perfectly said! -

[Nonreality]

I think that a few missed the point and the humor of this link. We had people that took offense. The point wasn't science or feeling and hearing things that can or cannot be measured. It was the fact that a vendor was willing to take a review or not based on the results. He asked the wrong person but then made his case worse by his comments to the person he was hoping might make his case. A couple of people got all holier than thou about Dan's examination of the case but that isn't the humor here. I don't really care if you are the best audiophile in the known universe, you really should find some humor here. We all know that music and sound is subjective but we should also be able to laugh and take offense at people that take advantage of others in the search for money.

[ncarver]

I think that a few missed the point and the humor of this link. ... We all know that music and sound is subjective but we should also be able to laugh and take offense at people that take advantage of others in the search for money.

I guess I didn't find this funny because I am not sure how the cable company guy was trying to "take advantage of others" by asking somebody with an audio website to review his cable. Yes, it is somewhat amusing that he asked somebody who believes that all cables sound identical. But the only way this is truly funny is if you believe that cables really do all sound the same, are just "snake oil," and are known to be such by the people that make and sell them. Since a great many of us do not believe this, the linked post is not in any way funny. It is not that we missed the point, it is that you don't understand why we would be offended by a post that effectively calls us stupid and deluded. Actually, I did laugh at somebody that fancies himself an objectivist/scientist yet doesn't feel he has to waste his time measuring or in any way testing these cables to know for an absolute fact that they cannot possibly sound different under any circumstances in any system. That is actually pretty damn funny! Ha, ha, ha, ha.

[Nonreality]

I guess I didn't find this funny because I am not sure how the cable company guy was trying to "take advantage of others" by asking somebody with an audio website to review his cable. Yes, it is somewhat amusing that he asked somebody who believes that all cables sound identical. But the only way this is truly funny is if you believe that cables really do all sound the same, are just "snake oil," and are known to be such by the people that make and sell them. Since a great many of us do not believe this, the linked post is not in any way funny. It is not that we missed the point, it is that you don't understand why we would be offended by a post that effectively calls us stupid and deluded. Actually, I did laugh at somebody that fancies himself an objectivist/scientist yet doesn't feel he has to waste his time measuring or in any way testing these cables to know for an absolute fact that they cannot possibly sound different under any circumstances in any system. That is actually pretty damn funny! Ha, ha, ha, ha.

So it wasn't funny that the vendor when confronted with a possible bad review decided it wasn't worth the risk? He only wanted someone to rubber stamp their approval not really review the cables. Sorry if his (Dan's)beliefs don't jell with yours but I'm sure even you would want vendors to work differently than this.

[RonM]

Don't worry, Mr. Nonreality, some people just Will Not Get the problem with selective attention. And it's not just audiophiles.

It's only relatively recently that there has been any kind of push towards publication of "negative results" in a number of sciences -- historically, you defined a problem, devised a study to address the hypotheses, and then reported the results when you GOT FAVORABLE RESULTS. The ones that didn't produce favorable results never saw the light of day.

It's similar here -- send out cables to be tested, but then make it clear that if you don't like the results you won't publish them. Someone is bound to be sufficiently deluded to give a favorable review (see all the posts above), and THAT'S the one that will see life in the promotion.

Leon Festinger's concept of cognitive dissonance is also salient here. When we have commited to something (bought a car, acquired a religious belief, bought a ton of expensive audio gear and become a true-believing audiophile) we tend to pay attention to things that reinforce or support our action or belief. We experience what Festinger called cognitive dissonance when we encounter information that tends to cast our choices in a less than positive light -- we'll read articles praising our swell new car or describing the tenets of our new religion (whether or not it's the Catholic Church or the Church of Sound), but will avoid those that lead us in a different direction.

Which is not to say that the "positive" articles in question are wrong, just that counter messages are avoided -- so the belief in what we already believe in is continually strengthened, without reference to more critical kind of information.

Scientists have to work diligently to avoid this; we all should.

R.

[ncarver]

So it wasn't funny that the vendor when confronted with a possible bad review decided it wasn't worth the risk? He only wanted someone to rubber stamp their approval not really review the cables. Sorry if his (Dan's)beliefs don't jell with yours but I'm sure even you would want vendors to work differently than this.

The way I read Dan's response was that he had already made up his mind and knew exactly that these cables would not sound any different than any other cable, and that he did not even need to be doing any measuring let along listening. Why on earth would anyone have somebody "review" his product if the "reviewer" had already made up his mind (against the product) before even doing the review? Sorry, but I found Dan's response to be the complete opposite of being objective/scientific, and so it is Dan that is funny (or pathetic).

You seem to think that Dan's response suggested that he would give a fair and objective assessment of the cables, but simply could not make any promises about the review being positive, so the manufacturer declined. I would be very interested to have you quote here what in Dan's response suggested he was willing to be open minded and objective in reviewing the cables.

[Nonreality]

The way I read Dan's response was that he had already made up his mind and knew exactly that these cables would not sound any different than any other cable, and that he did not even need to be doing any measuring let along listening. Why on earth would anyone have somebody "review" his product if the "reviewer" had already made up his mind (against the product) before even doing the review? Sorry, but I found Dan's response to be the complete opposite of being objective/scientific, and so it is Dan that is funny (or pathetic).

You seem to think that Dan's response suggested that he would give a fair and objective assessment of the cables, but simply could not make any promises about the review being positive, so the manufacturer declined. I would be very interested to have you quote here what in Dan's response suggested he was willing to be open minded and objective in reviewing the cables.

I'm kind of dismayed at your response to all of this. You have taken it as Dan and myself have attacked the very nature of your existence. It's anything but for myself. I know you think you hear a difference between cables and all is good. You have the money to spend and it may well sound better to you. I don't really mind that. I didn't post this to make you feel bad my friend. I posted it to show what cable vendors are willing to do and you don't get it. It's fine. No problem whatsoever if thats a word. I don't think he called you stupid he just said that some are very believing and get sucked into things that they ought not to buy. I don't think you would ever buy anything that you didn't fully check out. I'm not sure why you take such a negative to all of this but really don't take it personal, I really,really never meant it that way. I make fun of audiophiles sometimes but only in jest and wish I could afford to be one so that I could find out the truth. But I know I never would but it would be fun to try.

[Nonreality]

Don't worry, Mr. Nonreality, some people just Will Not Get the problem with selective attention. And it's not just audiophiles.

It's only relatively recently that there has been any kind of push towards publication of "negative results" in a number of sciences -- historically, you defined a problem, devised a study to address the hypotheses, and then reported the results when you GOT FAVORABLE RESULTS. The ones that didn't produce favorable results never saw the light of day.

It's similar here -- send out cables to be tested, but then make it clear that if you don't like the results you won't publish them. Someone is bound to be sufficiently deluded to give a favorable review (see all the posts above), and THAT'S the one that will see life in the promotion.

Leon Festinger's concept of cognitive dissonance is also salient here. When we have commited to something (bought a car, acquired a religious belief, bought a ton of expensive audio gear and become a true-believing audiophile) we tend to pay attention to things that reinforce or support our action or belief. We experience what Festinger called cognitive dissonance when we encounter information that tends to cast our choices in a less than positive light -- we'll read articles praising our swell new car or describing the tenets of our new religion (whether or not it's the Catholic Church or the Church of Sound), but will avoid those that lead us in a different direction.

Which is not to say that the "positive" articles in question are wrong, just that counter messages are avoided -- so the belief in what we already believe in is continually strengthened, without reference to more critical kind of information.

Scientists have to work diligently to avoid this; we all should.

R.

Very nice post my friend. I read it to my son and we both have fallen prey to the same principle. It's just human nature to once you commit to something it's nice to have fellow friends. And really there is nothing wrong with it unless you are selling something.

Edit: Please lose the Mr. as we are all friends here. RonM