More 'Audiophile' bullsh*t
Discussion
robbiekhan said:
SteveKTMer said:
£21 cable by the time it reaches your sticky letter box is probably 40p cable and £20.60 profit, marketing, packaging, transit, post office etc etc
The £400 cable is probably £20 cable and £380 profit, marketing, packing, transit, post etc.
So it's really 40p versus maybe £20, so I'd bet at least a tenner that there is a difference, all else being equal and of a high enough quality to make the comparison worthwhile.
https://www.soundguys.com/cable-myths-reviving-the-coathanger-test-23553/The £400 cable is probably £20 cable and £380 profit, marketing, packing, transit, post etc.
So it's really 40p versus maybe £20, so I'd bet at least a tenner that there is a difference, all else being equal and of a high enough quality to make the comparison worthwhile.
"What this experiment doesn’t prove
I’m not entirely sure how or why that first coathanger sample was so convincing for Android Authority readers, but I suspect that there might be something that compelled many people to simply choose the first option on the list—perhaps to see the results faster? We’ve seen that before. In any case, all of the other questions fall roughly into line with what we expected to see. We then tested three hypotheses against all the results, and came up with the following:
Few people could reliably tell the difference between a coathanger and a high-end cable: inconclusive
Fewer people prefer the coathanger over the high-end cable: rejected
Fewer people prefer the high-end cable over the coathanger: confirmed
The only hypothesis we were able to confirm was that fewer people would choose the high end cable over the coathanger—and we were unable to confirm the original hypothesis that few people would be reliably able to tell the difference between the two (we should have logged how many people were correct all three times). However, this result is encouraging, because we could change the test design a little bit to add success rates and potentially prove the original hypothesis. Our idea wasn’t disproven, and the only thing we definitively proved is consistent with the idea that high-end cables generally aren’t worth the staggering increase in cost by performance alone."
Personally super expensive cables mean nothing to me, I have decent quality audio gear and hear the same details whether the cable is cheap or not. I only care about construction quality and the design of the cable as I keep my gear for many many years so want stuff to last if I'm handling them daily.
Edited by robbiekhan on Thursday 9th May 22:42
But for headphone or microphone cable there are other considerations, it's not as simple as their ytest.
Sporky said:
SteveKTMer said:
£21 cable by the time it reaches your sticky letter box is probably 40p cable and £20.60 profit, marketing, packaging, transit, post office etc etc
The £400 cable is probably £20 cable and £380 profit, marketing, packing, transit, post etc.
I'd say the £400 cable is probably £1 to make, but the Veblen effect seems to apply particularly strongly in the audio world. The £400 cable is probably £20 cable and £380 profit, marketing, packing, transit, post etc.
Tony1963 said:
We can pretend all sorts and only be lying to ourselves.
“Oh, I can’t afford a £400 cable, so I’ll find every reason I can for not only not even trying it, but why people who do buy it are stupid and frivolous with their easily obtained wealth.”
It's less complicated than that: Hifi cables aren't sold with any sort of objective, quantitative performance stated. Objective and quantitative performance figures are brilliant when you are trying to demonstrate why your product is better than the cheaper ones.“Oh, I can’t afford a £400 cable, so I’ll find every reason I can for not only not even trying it, but why people who do buy it are stupid and frivolous with their easily obtained wealth.”
BHP? More is better. 0-124mph? Less is better. Look at all the lateral g's our new Corvette will pull!
Every single electronic engineer on the planet knows what a Bode plot and a Nyquist plot are, and any electronic engineer with any sort of testing skills could devise the relevant testing methodology for a repeatable, comparative and quantitative test.
It's really not hard. I bet somewhere on the internet someone is posting graphs of this stuff but it's not in the marketing material of any manufacturers I've seen yet.
donkmeister said:
It's less complicated than that: Hifi cables aren't sold with any sort of objective, quantitative performance stated. Objective and quantitative performance figures are brilliant when you are trying to demonstrate why your product is better than the cheaper ones.
BHP? More is better. 0-124mph? Less is better. Look at all the lateral g's our new Corvette will pull!
Every single electronic engineer on the planet knows what a Bode plot and a Nyquist plot are, and any electronic engineer with any sort of testing skills could devise the relevant testing methodology for a repeatable, comparative and quantitative test.
It's really not hard. I bet somewhere on the internet someone is posting graphs of this stuff but it's not in the marketing material of any manufacturers I've seen yet.
I agree! But then a well respected engineer I know tries a new lead, knowing it can't possibly make any difference because... it can't, and he hears a difference. He swaps back, leaves things as they are etc, and can definitely hear a difference. He laughs, and keeps the new lead because the difference is an improvement. What does he do? Not believe his own ears? Shrug his shoulders and admit that life is too short and busy to try to explain it, so keep the new lead in place? BHP? More is better. 0-124mph? Less is better. Look at all the lateral g's our new Corvette will pull!
Every single electronic engineer on the planet knows what a Bode plot and a Nyquist plot are, and any electronic engineer with any sort of testing skills could devise the relevant testing methodology for a repeatable, comparative and quantitative test.
It's really not hard. I bet somewhere on the internet someone is posting graphs of this stuff but it's not in the marketing material of any manufacturers I've seen yet.
You can throw all the advanced electronic science you want at me, I won't be any the wiser, because I really don't think I'll be buying anything substantial for my system before I pop my clogs, but I'm not going to tell him he's wrong.
If we're descending to using anecdata about non-blinds testing as proof that expensive cables aren't quackery (versus all the science and properly conducted tests showing they are) then we can all make up whatever we like, and the Machina Dynamica Brilliant Pebbles definitely work because quantum.
If you like being fooled.
When people are selling £30 network switches for thousands, don't trust your ears unless you've removed expectation ftom the test. Even getting out of your chair to change a cable can affect your hearing gecause if the change in bloodflow. The human hearing system is not a good analytical tool.
Have a Google of auditory illusions - there are loads of them that demonstrate how easy it is to make you hear things that aren't there, or not hear things that are.
When people are selling £30 network switches for thousands, don't trust your ears unless you've removed expectation ftom the test. Even getting out of your chair to change a cable can affect your hearing gecause if the change in bloodflow. The human hearing system is not a good analytical tool.
Have a Google of auditory illusions - there are loads of them that demonstrate how easy it is to make you hear things that aren't there, or not hear things that are.
Sporky said:
If you like being fooled.
When people are selling £30 network switches for thousands, don't trust your ears unless you've removed expectation ftom the test. Even getting out of your chair to change a cable can affect your hearing gecause if the change in bloodflow. The human hearing system is not a good analytical tool.
Have a Google of auditory illusions - there are loads of them that demonstrate how easy it is to make you hear things that aren't there, or not hear things that are.
Lol, I don’t need to go reading any of that. It’s mostly old hat, and extremely boring. I’m happy with my old Naim gear, and I’m on the verge of retirement, so wasting more than a few minutes on things that don’t concern me ain’t gonna happen. When people are selling £30 network switches for thousands, don't trust your ears unless you've removed expectation ftom the test. Even getting out of your chair to change a cable can affect your hearing gecause if the change in bloodflow. The human hearing system is not a good analytical tool.
Have a Google of auditory illusions - there are loads of them that demonstrate how easy it is to make you hear things that aren't there, or not hear things that are.
When people tell me that what I heard didn’t happen, I know it’s end of chat.
When people dismiss science - and refuse point-blank to learn - it's a bit sad.
This is how the audiophile nonsense continues. People unwilling to learn. People unwilling to test properly. People who think they can't get fooled.
Its fine to like what you've got - far better than constantly chasing "upgrades", but dismissing testable evidence in favour of anecdata and biased testing is quite another thing.
This is how the audiophile nonsense continues. People unwilling to learn. People unwilling to test properly. People who think they can't get fooled.
Its fine to like what you've got - far better than constantly chasing "upgrades", but dismissing testable evidence in favour of anecdata and biased testing is quite another thing.
Edited by Sporky on Friday 10th May 16:05
SteveKTMer said:
My old Naim kit is fine for me to but I have been very surprised at the difference a Chord DAC makes over other relatively expensive kit, I've been very impressed.
Chord DACs are very good, and, crucially, give wonderful sounding music. Did you need to do loads of testing, blindfolded by an orphaned baby donkey, with an AB-X non-binary person in the room to ensure you couldn’t tell when the coat hangers were being removed from a non-connected socket?
Sporky said:
When people dismiss science - and refuse point-blank to learn - it's a bit sad.
This is how the audiophile nonsense continues. People unwilling to learn. People unwilling to test properly. People who think they can't get fooled.
Its fine to like what you've got - far better than constantly chasing "upgrades", but dismissing testable evidence in favour of anecdata and biased testing is quite another thing.
Why on earth is it a bit sad? I’m not buying anything!This is how the audiophile nonsense continues. People unwilling to learn. People unwilling to test properly. People who think they can't get fooled.
Its fine to like what you've got - far better than constantly chasing "upgrades", but dismissing testable evidence in favour of anecdata and biased testing is quite another thing.
Edited by Sporky on Friday 10th May 16:05
Tony1963 said:
Chord DACs are very good, and, crucially, give wonderful sounding music.
Did you need to do loads of testing, blindfolded by an orphaned baby donkey, with an AB-X non-binary person in the room to ensure you couldn’t tell when the coat hangers were being removed from a non-connected socket?
A very appropriate post for the "Audiophile Bullsht" thread.Did you need to do loads of testing, blindfolded by an orphaned baby donkey, with an AB-X non-binary person in the room to ensure you couldn’t tell when the coat hangers were being removed from a non-connected socket?
Tony1963 said:
Why on earth is it a bit sad? I’m not buying anything!
It's sad that you've refused to learn.It's also sad that you keep defending bulls
t products.And it's sad that you resort to ridicule to defend that position.
Anyone who wants a good, readable primer on the subject could do a lot wise than buying an old copy of The Science Of Sound (Rossing et al).
Sporky said:
It's sad that you've refused to learn.
It's also sad that you keep defending bullst products.
And it's sad that you resort to ridicule to defend that position.
Anyone who wants a good, readable primer on the subject could do a lot wise than buying an old copy of The Science Of Sound (Rossing et al).
I don’t refuse to learn. I’m just at ease with how my system sounds, and treating my hifi like it’s a piece of scientific test equipment just doesn’t appeal to me. Just as learning all the ins and outs of how the ECU on my car works doesn’t appeal. I know a few basics, it works, I’m happy. It's also sad that you keep defending bulls
t products.And it's sad that you resort to ridicule to defend that position.
Anyone who wants a good, readable primer on the subject could do a lot wise than buying an old copy of The Science Of Sound (Rossing et al).
Which bull**** products have I defended?
It’s not ridicule, it’s just humour.
If you like to know as much about the science of audio replay as you reasonably can, go for it. That’s not something anyone should have a problem with. What I do have a problem with is people not believing their own senses. I’m not talking about hearing minute differences, but when I can hear a clear sound that isn’t there with a different item in a system, and a mate also notices it, and we laugh, no amount of being blinded by science is going to convince me I didn’t hear it.
Sporky said:
Youve never seen an optical illusion?
Oh c’mon, I think you’re scraping the barrel there. Do you think recorded music is designed to confuse our ears? Well ok, some makes me wonder why anyone bothered, but good music rarely does that. Joke: my wife caught me mastur*****g over an optical illusion. I said “It’s not what it looks like…”
Tony1963 said:
Oh c’mon, I think you’re scraping the barrel there. Do you think recorded music is designed to confuse our ears? Well ok, some makes me wonder why anyone bothered, but good music rarely does that.
Certainly the barber pole effect has been used in music - there's a Beatles track I forget the name of for one.That's not really the point though. Your eyes and ears can be fooled. So when a company makes claims about expensive cables that fly in the face of well established, well tested, and well proven science, saying "you don't know if you've not had a casual listen to it" isnt being open-minded.
A sloppy demo can very easily make one option sound better than another - a teeny nudge of the volume. I've done it on purpose to save customers money. I've cheated and played through the same speakers and amp each time, with a switch that actually tweaks level or eq by a tiny amount - the audience heard different speakers. I did one where I applied different processing to each speaker set so they sounded exactly the same. I've mixed noise into feeds to mask other differences.
The people in those tests believed their ears. I made them hear differences that weren't there, and not hear differences that were.
It's not about recorded music. It's about how susceptible the human hearing system is to being manipulated, and how poor it is at analytical decisions. It's that "I can hear a difference" doesn't mean there is one.
Sporky said:
Certainly the barber pole effect has been used in music - there's a Beatles track I forget the name of for one.
That's not really the point though. Your eyes and ears can be fooled. So when a company makes claims about expensive cables that fly in the face of well established, well tested, and well proven science, saying "you don't know if you've not had a casual listen to it" isnt being open-minded.
A sloppy demo can very easily make one option sound better than another - a teeny nudge of the volume. I've done it on purpose to save customers money. I've cheated and played through the same speakers and amp each time, with a switch that actually tweaks level or eq by a tiny amount - the audience heard different speakers. I did one where I applied different processing to each speaker set so they sounded exactly the same. I've mixed noise into feeds to mask other differences.
The people in those tests believed their ears. I made them hear differences that weren't there, and not hear differences that were.
It's not about recorded music. It's about how susceptible the human hearing system is to being manipulated, and how poor it is at analytical decisions. It's that "I can hear a difference" doesn't mean there is one.
I agree, and I always demoed at home in my system, when I did that sort of thing. And if I’ve ummed and aaahed about whether there’s an improvement, I’ve not bought the item. That's not really the point though. Your eyes and ears can be fooled. So when a company makes claims about expensive cables that fly in the face of well established, well tested, and well proven science, saying "you don't know if you've not had a casual listen to it" isnt being open-minded.
A sloppy demo can very easily make one option sound better than another - a teeny nudge of the volume. I've done it on purpose to save customers money. I've cheated and played through the same speakers and amp each time, with a switch that actually tweaks level or eq by a tiny amount - the audience heard different speakers. I did one where I applied different processing to each speaker set so they sounded exactly the same. I've mixed noise into feeds to mask other differences.
The people in those tests believed their ears. I made them hear differences that weren't there, and not hear differences that were.
It's not about recorded music. It's about how susceptible the human hearing system is to being manipulated, and how poor it is at analytical decisions. It's that "I can hear a difference" doesn't mean there is one.
I once had a home demo with a mate of a Chord Cobra din-din cable between my CD player and pre amp. This was in Saudi in 1999. Very little choice out there at the time, basic internet, expensive hifi mags, and I had no experience.
Anyway, played a few tracks with the system as it was, then fitted the Chord. It sounded very different. My mate thought it sounded better, I said just different but we needed to give it time. £80 wasn’t a silly price, but I was always careful. The next day, repeated the test, and it sounded exactly the same as the standard Naim cable.
Ok, I’m sure if we had been determined we might have heard some differences, but then you have to be sure it’s better, not just different. Try as we might, and my mate really wanted the cable because it was bright, shiny red instead of boring matte black, we handed it back to the dealer. No idea if there was any snake oil marketing going on, I didn’t read the brochure. We wanted it to be better, we couldn’t be sure, we walked away.
Cables and interconnects are always an interesting topic...
When swapping cables on audio equipment, they are never connected directly to the source. By that I mean, there is always whatever cable the source manufacturer used from the internal hardware to the binding posts/sockets etc, which stays the same, regardless of what post source cable an owner connects. Given that's the case, why replace the entire length of cable post the source equipment? Why not use a few meters of the same internal wiring used by the manufacturer and then simply replace the last couple of inches between it and the speaker/headphones/component? Surely the effect will be the same? Or does the total length or ratio of external to internal wiring have an effect? What about using several different sections of cabling to create a blend? Does it make a difference what order or ratio this blended cable is constructed?
When swapping cables on audio equipment, they are never connected directly to the source. By that I mean, there is always whatever cable the source manufacturer used from the internal hardware to the binding posts/sockets etc, which stays the same, regardless of what post source cable an owner connects. Given that's the case, why replace the entire length of cable post the source equipment? Why not use a few meters of the same internal wiring used by the manufacturer and then simply replace the last couple of inches between it and the speaker/headphones/component? Surely the effect will be the same? Or does the total length or ratio of external to internal wiring have an effect? What about using several different sections of cabling to create a blend? Does it make a difference what order or ratio this blended cable is constructed?
Gassing Station | Home Cinema & Hi-Fi | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff