|   Interconnect test | MajorDump
Apr 25, 2001 7:05 PM | | Little background to how this came about. My receiver has a peak indicator for analog source signals. If the light flashes then you have a choice, use the Attenuate button, or if your source has the option, use the variable volumn control on your source. I prefer to use the variable volumn control on my cd player, because usually 1 or 2 db from max takes care of it, where the Att button seems to reduce the db more than this. Just a little more flexable with the variable volumn control on the cd player.
Anyway I got the idea of switching analog interconnects to see if it would make any difference in how much of the source was getting through. This peak indicator, I thought would be a good indicator, maybe. No ears involved at all. I picked a particular cd that had a high level, to where I would have to back off on the variable volumn 2db to get the peak indicator to stop flashing. This is with my current interconnects that I use now. I switched out to some generic cables. Started up the cd, the player was at full variable volumn on the exact same cd, no flashing peak indicator. Just to make sure it was not a fluke or some bad cables, I did the same with 2 more sets of generic cables. Same outcome. Put my current cables of choice back on, the peak indicator was flashing again until I backed off to - 2db again. Thought that was pretty interesting. |
| re: Interconnect test | Eyespy
Apr 25, 2001 7:32 PM | | The important question pertaining to a possible "sonic signature" or audible characteristics of the sample interconnects is this: In a bias controlled level matched listening test, are there any discernable audible differences? Level matching removes the effects of simple volume differences between cables. |
| re: Interconnect test | MajorDump
Apr 25, 2001 8:14 PM | | The point would be, not all cables are equal, as some would lead you to believe. A cable with a positive volume difference, to me would be a more efficient cable. I would prefer a more efficient cable myself. |
| re: Interconnect test | Eyespy
Apr 25, 2001 9:14 PM | | "The point would be, not all cables are equal, as some would lead you to believe"
And just who, do tell, would want to lead me to believe that? |
| re: Interconnect test | hifitommy
Apr 25, 2001 9:17 PM | | i truly dont know that your flashing light has anyhting to do with EFFICIENCY. perhaps that cable was picking up rfi. how can you know? eyespy will verify that i will be the first to say that i hear diffs in wire. im not a fanatic about it to where i recommend BIG BUX cables, but there are diffs.
after 25yrs of hifi, my ears arent playing tricks on me and i dont make snap judgements.
as for efficiency, its not always what its cracked up to be. many spkrs are very efficient, few of those sound acceptable. louder doesnt always equate to better.
........regards....tr |
| re: Interconnect test | Eyespy
Apr 25, 2001 9:25 PM | | "eyespy will verify that i will be the first to say that i hear diffs in wire."
This I can verify. |
| re: Interconnect test | MajorDump
Apr 25, 2001 10:18 PM | | Your right as far as speakers go. But I will have to disagree with you on the cables. |
| re: Interconnect test | mtrycrafts
Apr 25, 2001 11:17 PM | | >>>after 25yrs of hifi, my ears arent playing tricks on me and i dont make snap judgements.<<<
No, of course not. You have trained your ears well. Unfortunately, you are only fooling yourslef. |
| re: Interconnect test | mtrycrafts
Apr 25, 2001 11:20 PM | | While level differences do occurr between thick and very thin speaker cables, there has yet to be a verified level difference between interconnects. Hence, I would attribute this to operator error and faulty testing. That simple. |
| re: Interconnect test | MajorDump
Apr 26, 2001 5:53 PM | | It doesn't really matter if you accept it or not. I don't need your acceptance. After all, who are you? This post was not for your acceptance or rejection. I was just posting an experience I had.
Wasn't like it was a major operation anyway. Not a whole lot to go wrong. Been changing interconnects for many years now. Doesn't take a genius to put them on, and make sure they are on right. No errors there. If there was error on my part, do you think the results would repeat? Same CD, same track for the tests. Like one poster mentioned, maybe some RF interference. Maybe, maybe not. I kind of doubt that though because my IC of choice is a braided 3 wire configuration, with 1 silver and 2 copper wires. No shielding. The generic cables were the typical interconnects. If there was RF interence, probably would of affected all cables used. |
| re: Interconnect test | mtrycrafts
Apr 27, 2001 10:53 PM | | Yes, I know all about personal experiences and doing things for a long time, even if it is done incorrectly. You are not the first with long experiences and you are not immune from unreliable experiences. |
| re: Interconnect test | Dupper
Apr 26, 2001 5:56 PM | | Maybe you challenge Eye then. He seems to thing there are level differences in interconnects. Level matching interconnects for tests? |
| re: Interconnect test | Eyespy
Apr 26, 2001 7:43 PM | | "Level matching interconnects for tests?"
I never said there were or were not level differences. If there are, level matching is a mandatory control. If there are not, level matching is inherent to the comparison. In either case, it is material to the question of a listening comparison. |
| re: Interconnect test | Dupper
Apr 26, 2001 9:05 PM | | Level matching removes the effects of simple volume differences between cables.
Did you not say this? |
| re: Interconnect test | Eyespy
Apr 26, 2001 9:08 PM | | Of course I said it. I just explained to you why I said it. |
| re: Interconnect test | Adi
Apr 26, 2001 9:28 PM | | >>I never said there were or were not level differences. If there are, level matching is a mandatory control.
Gotta love it Eye. So you have no idea if the level differences exists or not, yet it is scientific to challenge "testable claims". Oh, I got it! If the alien abductions are true, we dont know what evidence to look for, if they are false there is no evidence to find. Therefore it is safe to challenge the "testable claims".
Thanks for making my day. :-)
Adi |
| re: Interconnect test | Eyespy
Apr 26, 2001 9:48 PM | | "So you have no idea if the level differences exists or not,"
When is this determined, and how, as to whether a level difference exists? Don't strain yourself, it's an easy one. Would you prefer to conduct a test with a forgone conclusion about the existance or lack thereof of a level difference in advance? You'd not find fault with that? Or better to determine this and if present, apply the necessary controls for it, and if not present, the test is inherantly level matched? How would you prefer it? Now, go back and re-read. Show me where I stated I had no idea. I see you have not cured your reading comprehension disability. Happy to have made your day.
Yes, it is acceptable to challange a testable claim. What other testable claim would you be interested in asserting this evening?
Now, do you need any help with the alien abduction stories? |
| re: Interconnect test | Adi
Apr 26, 2001 9:55 PM | | >>Now, do you need any help with the alien abduction stories?
sure, heard any good once lately? |
| Sure. I just read a great one. | Eyespy
Apr 26, 2001 10:00 PM | | It went like this:
"Oh, I got it! If the alien abductions are true, we dont know what evidence to look for, if they are false there is no evidence to find. Therefore it is safe to challenge the "testable claims".
Thanks for making my day. :-)" |
| Sure. I just read a great one. | Dupper
Apr 27, 2001 8:24 PM | | And I have another one, man walked on the moon!!! Do you believe it? Do you have proof? Is that real footage, or video that was made in a studio? I personally believe it, but I can't prove it. Lots of things in the world that you choose to believe but can't, or don't have the resources, or feel you don't need to take the time to prove. |
| Sure. I just read a great one. | Eyespy
Apr 27, 2001 8:41 PM | | That's why we don't ask for an absolute proof. Oh, just some credible evidence, just as in the moon landing, would do for cable audible differences, you think? Not a very tough concept to grasp, is it? |
| Sure. I just read a great one. | Dupper
Apr 27, 2001 10:06 PM | | Exactly how credible is the moon landing evidence? Its our government your talking about LOL! And DBT tests posting on websites is credible evidence? Don't know about that. If they were certified, I would say they are credible. But with the flaws in them, don't think they could be certified. It only matters what we choose to believe is credible. And that is yet just another opinion. Since there is no absolute proof then, everyone should treat it that way. |
| Sure. I just read a great one. | Eyespy
Apr 27, 2001 10:22 PM | | "Since there is no absolute proof then, everyone should treat..."
Nothing in science offers absolute proof. It is a non-concept, and totally out of the realm of science.
"And DBT tests posting on websites is credible evidence?"
It's a more credible absent evidence for audible differences amongst like-gauged speaker wires than sighted listening is evidence for such differences.
"Exactly how credible is the moon landing evidence?"
It's highly credible. |
| Sure. I just read a great one. | mtrycrafts
Apr 27, 2001 11:01 PM | | >>>"Exactly how credible is the moon landing evidence?" <<<
Will anything satisfy you about this? |
| Sure. I just read a great one. | mtrycrafts
Apr 27, 2001 10:58 PM | | What proof would satisfy you? |
| re: Interconnect test | mtrycrafts
Apr 27, 2001 10:51 PM | | Checking for level differences before a listening test is standard protocol. Nothing to challange eye on. |
| re: Interconnect test | Eyespy
Apr 27, 2001 11:52 PM | | Apparently Adi and Dupper don't have a good handle on this. That doesn't stop them from arguing about it, though. |
| Simple question | Adi
Apr 26, 2001 11:04 AM | | >>In a bias controlled level matched listening test
"level matching" for testing interconnects? Since when? |
| Simple question...answer#1 | estan
Apr 26, 2001 11:20 AM | | since forever....
Main reasons are...
1- your ears sensitivity to different frequencies changes at differing sound levels.
2- acoustic interaction of the listening room changes at differing SPL's.
3- The noise floor in relation to the music level will change.
4- testing has shown that a slightly higher spl will usually gather
a response of better or an improvement of perceived sound quality. (note...this is a trick commonly employed by some audio sales people when demoing similar components and trying to influence the sale of one over the other)
5 - what good is any test without controls in place... |
| Simple question...answer#1.1 | John Stalberg
Apr 26, 2001 12:13 PM | | 6-if the issue is;are there any differences at all? Then you can´t begin with different levels. That would spoil the test..... |
| Simple question...answer#1 | Adi
Apr 26, 2001 12:54 PM | | You are just repeating rhetoric without any clue what so ever, which makes it BS. |
| Simple question...answer#1 | estan
Apr 26, 2001 1:22 PM | | the only BS here is what's between your ears and I have a big clue about you...I can smell it all the way over here. |
| hey now. you're starting to sound like me. | observer
Apr 26, 2001 1:49 PM | | sometimes a little truth and logic is not welcomed here unless it points to a favorible conclusion, podner. perhaps you now see what i was talking about?
enjoy...
(who was that masked man, riding a horse named 12 guage copper?) |
| hey now. you're starting to sound like me. | estan
Apr 26, 2001 3:24 PM | | what a way to spend an afternoon...i was going to spec some Focal bass drivers for the Spica's and drive out to Zalytron to pick them up...oh well...maybe tomorrow.
greetings from The Center For Higher Resolution |
| Back to CABLES-101 | Adi
Apr 26, 2001 2:03 PM | | http://forums.consumerreview.com/crforum?14@@.ee8b0cf/7
Now, wanna take another guess what is that you are smelling? |
| Back to CABLES-101 | estan
Apr 26, 2001 3:16 PM | | refute with an intelligent answer everything that I have said and then you become of value. If you leave a lump of sh*t out to dry long enough even it will stop smelling ...so you do have a chance. |
| Back to CABLES-101 | oozing abcess
Apr 26, 2001 8:33 PM | | So I take you have tested this claim.I hope ypu didn't get any on your nose,or did you account for sudden shifts in wind velocities. |
| You can design and interconnect to lower the level! | Pat D
Apr 27, 2001 10:50 AM | | In fact, I once did so. I put a simple voltage divider in an interconnect to lower the output of a CDP into my receiver, as the CDP was so much louder than the phono, tuner, or tape deck. So, for scientific purposes, it would be best to match the levels even with interconnects. There is certainly no harm in doing so. |
| With no data to refute points,Adi goes for ad hominem attack | Richard Greene
Apr 26, 2001 1:31 PM | | Your post has no value to fellow Audioreview readers and
insults another poster with a childish ad hominem attack
(refuting his points might require some thinking on your part)
that makes your post complete BS, in my opinion.
Observe carefully as I try to offer some advice of value to
AudioReview.com readers:
The primary sonic differences among wires, solid state amplifiers,
and CD players is that any two brands/models are likely to play
music at slightly different volumes.
In a published wire comparison conducted under blind conditions,
11 of 11 audiophiles could hear a difference between
30 feet of 24AWG speaker wire and 30 feet of 12AWG speaker wire.
But when the volumes were matched, only 4 of 10 audiophiles could still hear a difference. That means different volumes accounted for
the differences heard by a majority of participants in this blind comparison (before the SPL's were matched). |
| Hello Xfile! | Adi
Apr 26, 2001 1:51 PM | | We are now jumping from 3 ft interconnects ( which you always use as an example in your arguments against "golden ears"), to 30ft 24Ga vs 30ft 12Ga speaker cables. You know better than that Richard.
Why is that you cant explain and educate that poor guy who has no clue what I am talking about. What are you afraid off?
BTW, didnt you also claim in the past, NO one was able to differenciate between those speaker cables you mentioned above, in your ABX listening "auditions"? Does that mean your "auditions" are worthless since there is a "published" comparision to the contrary?
Adi |
| That should read Xphile :-) nt | Adi
Apr 26, 2001 1:59 PM | | . |
| Hello Xfile! | mtrycrafts
Apr 26, 2001 5:33 PM | | >>>BTW, didnt you also claim in the past, NO one was able to differenciate between those speaker cables you mentioned above, in your ABX listening "auditions"? Does that mean your "auditions" are worthless since there is a "published" comparision to the contrary? <<<
Would you post Richards past post where he compared 24ga and 12ga and no report of differences were heard, by all participants? He compares comparable cables. This do not qualify for that.
One must also ask at what frequencies were the levels matched between the 24ga and 12ga? Perhaps it rolled off the higher band enough for those few to hear. Level matching at 1khz is not enough in some cases as this one may show. But most adequate for most comparables. |
| Hello Xfile! | Dupper
Apr 26, 2001 6:04 PM | | I find it very funny, the original post started out talking about a test this guy did with interconnects, and you guys are fighting about speaker wire. |
| Hello Xfile! | mtrycrafts
Apr 27, 2001 11:05 PM | | I am? Curious indeed. |
| Hello Xfile! | Adi
Apr 26, 2001 6:49 PM | | >>Would you post Richards past post where he compared 24ga and 12ga and no report of differences were heard, by all participants?
Why waste our time searching the archives, when Richard can confirm it himself. If he doesnt I will look into it.
>>He compares comparable cables.
That might be, but he also did the other test. |
| Adi, I'll bet $1,000 that you can't hear wire differences | Richard Greene
Apr 27, 2001 1:22 PM | | Another day, another argument.
All ABX double-blind auditions I attended were volume-matched
to very close tolerances using sine wave test tones ...
and all single blind auditions of borrowed equipment I do at
home are volume-matched to the best of my ability.
I know of no human being on this planet who has demonstrated the
ability to hear differences of 3 foot interconnects and 10 foot
speaker wires under double-blind conditions. If you know of someone
who has accomplished this, please provide a name.
If you believe you can hear differences among 3 foot interconnects or 10 foot speaker wires while listening to music in a normally reverberant room, with volumes matched, under blind conditions ...
then I have $1,000 to wager -- I say you can not hear any differences
among wires intended for audio use in the lengths specified above
(or shorter) - any "differences" are entirely in your imagination.
Put up some money ...
or shut up ...
about wires. |
| Science or Pissing contest? | Adi
Apr 27, 2001 2:49 PM | | Why would my ability to detect differences in cables under the blind conditions matter, unless ofcourse we are arguing "whose is bigger". What I hear or not has no scientific relevance. And these wagers are not scientific, and anyone with a little regard to science would agree with me. Everyone can also learn a little from jj and Jon Risch, both of whom are very knowledgable and weighted in on this subject.
http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/general/messages/116165.html
http://forums.consumerreview.com/crforum?14@@.ee87a0c/17
Wanna see the MORE proof? Show the correspondance between us in this thread to any (I mean literally ANY) person with scientific credentials in relevant fields, for review.
I appreciate you efforts in ABX testing and your cander in calling them "auditions" instead of "test" to avoid scientific scrutiny. Your experience has provided you valuable experience, I have no problems with that.
What I was suggesting to you was, since you have done the auditions in a certain way which lead to some predictable and consistent results sometimes contrary with atlease one "published" results, you have an option of investigating it further, if you choose to. Investiation should be on the validation of testing procedures according to the scientific standards for controlled listening test under bias contolled conditions.
Unless such an endeavor is undertaken (by you or anyone else), all we have is a pissing contest of egos, incomplete information and half-baked ideas.
You know Richard, I alwasy recommended cheap cables for newbies and midfi HT systems. I also stated on numerous occations, cable do are WORST in price/performance ratio. I dont think we have any disagreements there.
My issues are these pissing contests, blanket statements and promoting junk in the name of science. I would rather learn about scientific merits from the scientists.
Adi |
| "pissing contests, blanket statements and promoting junk..." | Richard Greene
Apr 27, 2001 4:03 PM | | I guess I can add your name to the list of people who can't hear
differences among 10 foot speaker cables and 3 foot interconnects.
Once again I have asked a golden ear to name one person in the
world who can hear wire differences under blind conditions ...
and once again all I hear is ...
silence.
My hypothesis is that 10 feet of 16AWG zip cord, or 3 feet of the
free interconnects that come with some audio components, produce a
"sound" that is so close to the "sound" of premium wires that
not one audiophile can actually hear any difference.
Prove my hypothesis is wrong by naming one person who can hear
the alleged wire differences.
In the absence of proof, advising other audiophiles
buy expensive wires is fraudulent advice.
Even my offer to pay $1,000 can't seem to drive any golden ears
to prove their ears are really "golden".
You'd think at least one person with exceptional hearing would exist.
It's amazing how easily golden ears can "hear" differences among wires during sighted auditions. Or at least they think ...
they can hear differences ... but they really can't! |
| YUP! Thats exactly what it is | Adi
Apr 27, 2001 4:30 PM | | and you are indulging in pissing context and junk science again.
Havent I asked you this simple question on numerous occations before? Lately, I am enjoying music and learning from knowledgable sources more than pissing contests. Can you say the same?
http://forums.consumerreview.com/crforum?14@@.ee84eff/50 |
| YUP! Thats exactly what it is | Dupper
Apr 27, 2001 7:05 PM | | You forget, alot of the naysayers are selective readers, and commentators. He hasn't answered right? Jon has answered him with why he won't. Yet he expects Jon to fall to his obviously pissing contest style. That is exactly why Jon won't. Its obvious Jon is above this.
I'm waiting on a claim by a certain somebody. Something easy to prove still no response also. The bad thing about this claim, if he doesn't respond, it could be a lie. And a lie to try to support his POV. And if that is the case... if his POV is so solid, why lie to support it? It was a lame one at that. What makes that different than someone that claims to hear a difference? That person believes they hear the difference. |
| YUP! Thats exactly what it is | mtrycrafts
Apr 27, 2001 11:15 PM | | >>>Its obvious Jon is above this. <<<<
No, you are out in left field again. Joh cannot support his claims, hence he is afraid to demonstrate as he has nothjing to gain and everything to loose, his reputation, if he has any. |
| YUP! Thats exactly what it is | mtrycrafts
Apr 27, 2001 11:18 PM | | >>>What makes that different than someone that claims to hear a difference? <<<<
It is obvious that you don't have the faintest idea who has what burden of proof. Had any training in science? |
| YUP! Thats exactly what it is | Dupper
Apr 28, 2001 10:01 AM | | And there you go picking single sentences out as if they were the main topic of my post. Respond to the whole post. |
| the general crux of this matter is thus... | Markw*
Apr 28, 2001 1:20 PM | | An option has been offered to several of the more vocal heavyweight "yeasayers" to publicly prove the "naysayers" wrong and walk away with $1000 to boot.
Sounds like easy money if their beliefs are valid, doesn't it?
It seems that nobody has enough faith in their own ears to accept this challange. Why is that? |
| the general crux of this matter is thus... | Dupper
Apr 28, 2001 4:37 PM | | It has been explained. Short term memory problems? |
| the general crux of this matter is thus... | Eyespy
Apr 28, 2001 5:06 PM | | Auditory memory for slight differences is short term. Seconds, even. |
| the general crux of this matter is thus... | mtrycrafts
Apr 28, 2001 9:51 PM | | That is the 'golden ear' affliction. |
| No, more like all talk and no action. | Markw*
Apr 29, 2001 4:47 AM | | why oh why do y'all run from such a simple (and profitable) challange if you believe so strongly?
If these differences are so great as they (and you) imply, then differentiating between them with such short a switching time should be a piece of cake, no?
The proof is in the pudding, no?
Oh, and if the dreaded DBT is so bad, what test do you suggest that would keep the identities of the component from being known during the test? It doesn't take a great mind to find flaws and offer no alternative solution. Little children can say "no" and "why" forever but that doesn't make then intelligent. |
| the general crux of this matter is thus... | mtrycrafts
Apr 28, 2001 9:49 PM | | At Rec Audio Opinion, the bounty is $2K for such a demonstration, or was a while back. The bounty has yet to be collected.
There was a $10K bount for supporting evidence for the Bedini ultra purifier. No takers.
Randi still has his $1Mil in the bank.
A common thread? |
| YUP! Thats exactly what it is | mtrycrafts
Apr 27, 2001 11:13 PM | | >>>and you are indulging in pissing context and junk science again. <<<
Oh, please. You who makes unsupported testable claims has no room to squak.
Just be careful about your so called 'knowledgeable sources.' |
| Here's your big chance, Adi. | Markw*
Apr 29, 2001 6:44 AM | | Go ahead. Take Richard's money!
...if you can.
Personally, I find it rather strange that once your visual abilities are removed from the equasion that your hearing deteriorates as well. I'd see a doctor if I were you. |
| You dont seem to understand | Adi
Apr 29, 2001 10:18 AM | | I am not interested in pissing contests.
And as for the money, I am very well off, thank you. I would suggest Richard to put that money to good use: donate it to worthy cause or buy some "science" books/publications and improve the knowledge.
Markw, why would anybody even consider Richard claims and challenges when he cant call his ventures tests? His results have contradictions and the explanations is:
Another day, another argument.
My SBT is far more reliable than any of the tests I have seen by regulars here.
Have a nice day.
Adi |
| You dont seem to understand | mtrycrafts
Apr 29, 2001 10:28 PM | | >>>My SBT is far more reliable than any of the tests I have seen by regulars here. <<<
Just more dreaming which you excell at. BUt I didn't expect anything fancy from you.
Oh, I am sure Richard would donate the money to charity if you so wish, or Jon, for that matter, or you can do it for free, for science. But chickens don't seem to want to. Yes, I know, nothing to prove. And I also know because you cannot. |
| You dont seem to understand | GCM
Apr 30, 2001 8:17 AM | | He's not the first or the last to run away with lame excuses when asked to stand behind his claims. These guys are all remarkably consistent in their behavior. |
| "pissing contests, blanket statements and promoting junk..." | Dupper
Apr 27, 2001 6:20 PM | | I guess you didn't even read the links in his post did you? It's already been answered, yet you persist. Yup, its a pissing contest!!!! |
| it's too bad you are so obviously outgunned. | observer
Apr 30, 2001 3:34 PM | | hey, you and Adi drew first. pardon us if we laugh. |
| Science or Pissing contest? | mtrycrafts
Apr 27, 2001 11:09 PM | | >>>results sometimes contrary with atlease one "published" results, <<<
And which one would that be? Please cite it. |
| It sounds like an easy thousand bucks for you IF... | Markw*
Apr 28, 2001 1:13 PM | | well, I think we all know what that IF means, don't we?
Of course, it could well be Richard that walks to the bank grinning from ear to ear.
But, from the confidince you show, I'm sure you will prevail. |
| Adi, I'll bet $1,000 that you can't hear wire differences | mtrycrafts
Apr 27, 2001 11:29 PM | | You think the chicken little would do it for free in the name of science? |
| Adi, I'll bet $1,000 that you can't hear wire differences | Eyespy
Apr 27, 2001 11:36 PM | | That would remove his objection |
| With no data to refute points,Adi goes for ad hominem attack | Dupper
Apr 26, 2001 6:01 PM | | Are these the famed flawed DBT tests? |
| With no data to refute points,Adi goes for ad hominem attack | mtrycrafts
Apr 27, 2001 11:21 PM | | And what do you know about DBT tests? Anything? Do you have any to offere? |
| With no data to refute points,Adi goes for ad hominem attack | Eyespy
Apr 27, 2001 11:39 PM | | Isn't dupper the poster who wants "absolute proof"? That should say enough. |
| With no data to refute points,Adi goes for ad hominem attack | Dupper
Apr 28, 2001 10:08 AM | | It's not that I want absolute proof. It's when there is none we make our choices. That was my point. |
| With no data to refute points,Adi goes for ad hominem attack | Eyespy
Apr 28, 2001 10:48 AM | | Your point is TOTALLY meaningless, Duper, as there is NEVER absolute proof. Not ever. |
| With no data to refute points,Adi goes for ad hominem attack | Dupper
Apr 28, 2001 12:23 PM | | My point is only meaningless to those who disagree with it. Some things can be proved and some things can't. I have proof that I am here typing this message right now on my computer. When there is no proof, people make choices. And someone making a different choice in the absense of proof, is why you argue with them? They won't fall in line with the Lemmings? Obviously the data that the naysayers point to isn't convincing enough to do this. I myself feel this way. I don't fall in line with the yaysayers either. I come to my own conclusions on the specs of a cable and my own ears. And others may do the same. If you don't like that, so what. It don't matter to me. I'm not on this earth to satisfy you. I make no claims. I keep them to myself. Because it only matters to myself. And I have no problem with you believing in what you believe. If what you found makes you happy great. I won't tell you your wrong. I can only point out why you COULD be wrong. Just as I COULD be wrong with my decisions. Because without proof, what is wrong? The thing I do have a problem with is people being harrased because the others dissagree with them.
I am sorry for the attitude that I carry in here sometimes. But because I am the INDIVIDUAL that I am, when people are attacked because of something they believe, it really bothers me. This is why the world is in the mess it is today. Governments, Religions, and people just can't handle someone having different beliefs and ways of life. All this talk here about bias in tests, what I just pointed out is bias. And what goes on in here is bias. There are a few in here that have no problem with others believing differently than they do, and obviously others that have a big problem with it.
So anytime I get vocal around here, it is usually because the way people are being treated, not because you have different points of view. Of course there are flaws in both stances here, thats why I come to my own conclusions. And that is what counts. I put my sound system together for my satisfaction, not to impress others. I like to play it for others to enjoy, but others had no influense on how I put it together.
So now that I told you a little about the real me, maybe you will understand why I come off as I do. If not, thats fine also. |
| With no data to refute points,Adi goes for ad hominem attack | Eyespy
Apr 28, 2001 12:34 PM | | If you are looking for an absolute proof, then you are outside the realm of a scientific discussion. I have no objection to your preference issues, nor are they subject to any challanges. All have there own personal prefernces. It is only where an unsubstantiated testable claim is asserted as if it were based on factual conditions and circumstances that I get concerned. So now you know a bit more about me, as well. |
| With no data to refute points,Adi goes for ad hominem attack | Dupper
Apr 28, 2001 1:37 PM | | Now tell me this. If someone believes something, why do you feel they need to prove it to you, or anyone else? Like you say, "nothing is absolute", so why push it? Especially in this case where its all subjective. Can I prove why I made the decision I did on the cables I use? Other than pointing you to the specs on the cables, I can only say I may, or may not. But as I pointed out before. I don't need to prove it to you. Your not going to be living with my decision and system, I will. I am comfortable with the decision, and its not something that I spend time worrying about once I made it. In the realm of my life, its not that important. |
| With no data to refute points,Adi goes for ad hominem attack | Eyespy
Apr 28, 2001 2:10 PM | | "If someone believes something, why do you feel they need to prove it to you, or anyone else"
No one is forcing anyone to prove anything. I don't force them to make unsupported claims of testable conditions and assert them as factual in lieu of a simple statement of a personal preference, either. I am opposed to false belief systems and pseudoscience disguised as the real thing, and I will expose and challange it when I encounter it. As such, alternative audio is fertile.
"? Like you say, "nothing is absolute", so why push it? Especially in this case where its all subjective."
Oh, but subjectivity of the asserted claims regarding cable sonics can be removed with the proper controls, and the understanding of the issues at hand can be moved into the arena of objectivity and appreciation of the underlying causal relationships. These are ultimately much more interesting, anyway. We don't need more human presence detectors, alien abduction stories, Bigfoot sightings, Bermuda Triangle "mysteries", channelers, quacks, and Uri Gellers running around promulgating nonesense unopposed.
"Can I prove why I made the decision I did on the cables I use?"
You can state the reasons you use the cables you do, should you so choose. You are under no obligation to prove that those were in fact your underlying reasons. If you make allegations regarding testable conditions of audible differences, I am free to question you as to how you arrived at your conclusions, and comment as to the reliability of your conclusions based on the methods you employed. This, however, places you under no direct obligations whatsoever.
"Your not going to be living with my decision and system, I will."
That is true. I will only point out the reliability or lack thereof on the merits of your decision as it pertains to any potential testable claims you may make. If you fail to make use of the information, that is your prerogative. Others are reading as well, and they may and often do derive benefit from my take-home message, as well as that of the other "naysayers", as we are prone to be labeled by the "yeasayers". |
| You sure don't walk it like you talk it, child.... | Markw*
Apr 29, 2001 6:49 AM | | If, as you say "I am comfortable with the decision, and its not something that I spend time worrying about once I made it. In the realm of my life, its not that important." is true, then why do you spend all this time defending it?
just another fly buzzing around the pile of dung that goes by the name of Adi? Your idol worship is all too obvious. |
| You sure don't walk it like you talk it, child.... | Dupper
Apr 29, 2001 6:45 PM | | Defending what? Have I made any claims? What I am doing is wondering why you guys keep harassing someone that already gave you an answer. The only thing I am defending is allowing people to have an opinion without being harassed over it. Now that you didn't get what you want from Jon, you going to try someone else? You guys really have a problem with someone believing differently than you do. If you don't want to believe it, great don't believe it. No one is forcing to you. Unlike some of the tactics that go on around here. You would rather have it dictated to people what they should believe. You are the one that gets overheated and starts throwing insults like a teenager. Now whos the child? I do believe I have not made any claims so how could I be idolizing anything? And your still the master of internet insults and bravery. I bow to you. |
| You STILL don't get it, child.... | Markw*
Apr 30, 2001 4:22 AM | | Anyone can have a personal preference. Nobody ever said otherwise.
Now, when one claims that their personal preference is
better" than anothers, then that;s where the questions arise.
That, and when one makes grand swweeping statements abut somrthing.
Who ARE the 4 out of 5 doctors that recommend Crest, anyway?
And, my reason foer calling you a child? You like to thrtow stoners and then when the going gets tough, you try to skate by crying "bit I didn't claim anythinh. wahhhh."
Well child, iyo usure do seem to like to hide behind others.
at least Adi and Jon have the cohones to make a statement in the first place. |
| You STILL don't get it, child.... | Dupper
Apr 30, 2001 6:56 PM | | Alls I can say, is look at your posts. Whos the child? |
| You STILL don't get it, child.... | Dupper
Apr 30, 2001 7:01 PM | | You want me to tell you how I buy my cables? Fine. I compair specs on them and buy what I think is practicle. |
| You sure don't walk it like you talk it, child.... | Dupper
Apr 29, 2001 6:48 PM | | So me a thread where I am defending a claim I made on cables please. |
| Can't say that I can | Markw*
Apr 30, 2001 4:45 AM | | Perhaps if you ever did back up either one of your claims or those made by tour idols I just might have some respect for you.
All you seem to be is like that little child that always says "what he said" and sticks his tounge out... and then runs home to mommy.
As it now stands, you are simply a little gnat buzzing around your idols in this discussion. No weight, simply annoying and with nothing of substance to add.
But, I will say this... you do give me some great straight lines. Keep setting me up. |
| Can't say that I can | Dupper
Apr 30, 2001 6:21 PM | | I idolize no one here. How could they be my idols if I don't totally agree? You dont see me repeating what they say. If you pay any attention, I have agreed with arguements for both sides. I don't agree with tactics some play. If you are getting bugged by me saying this, then your conscience must be the one bugging you. What is there to add to the debate? I think its all covered. As far as you adding anything... what I see alot of, is naysayers going in on a thread, and repeating what has already been said, but maybe adding a bit of sarcasm to it. Ganging up if you may. So I don't see that as a contribution to anything but ganging up on others. At least what I am doing is something different. Believe me, if a yaysayer was doing the same thing as some of the naysayers are doing, I would treat them the same. |
| Can't say that I can | Markw*
May 1, 2001 5:24 AM | | "Believe me, if a yaysayer was doing the same thing as some of the naysayers are doing, I would treat them the same."
You're so full of excrement that you draw flies. Your posts speak for themselves. I love how you hide behind Adi's skirt.
I've yet to see you argue their blatant claims. I DO see you jump to their defense, though. Riiiiiiiight. You're not biased.
I'm not gonna waste time intellectually arm wrestling your limp wristed arguments anymore.
I'll just use you for target practice. Conversation ended. |
| Intellectual arm wrestling? | Dupper
May 1, 2001 7:11 PM | | How am I hiding behind anyone? I am talking to you. I told you what my stance is on cables. You're mad because you can't harass me over it? Because thats what it seems like you like doing most. Now that someone throws it back in your face, you don't like it. If you think throwing childish insults around is intellectual arm wrestling then you would beat any one here. Telling someone to go cry to mommy, that they wear a skirt, and have limp wristed arguements, (these are the insults just in this thread) is real intellectual. It does nothing but show what kind of person you are. I think the person that is hiding behind something here is you. Calling people names while hiding behind the internet is real brave of you. What your saying is, ganging up on 1 person is ok, but 1 person calling you on it is not?!! Thats why I call you the master of internet bravery and insults. |
| Yep! Intellectual arm wrestling | Markw*
May 2, 2001 4:44 AM | | You have no points to make. Just an agenda.
When I see you attack someone making wondorus claims about cables with equal vigor then perhaps I'll see you in a different light.
As I see you now, I picture you peeking out from under a rock with a forked tounge, ready to crawl back under when asked for facts. Just another "yeasayer" trying to make points, no matter how you see yourself.
So, let's see where you can set me up now?
Oh, and FWIW, I am the same in person. I'll say in person what I say on the net. It's just thst few others have the ba!!s to act so confrontational in person so I rarely need to. |
| interesting point | observer
May 2, 2001 8:40 AM | | <<You have no points to make. Just an agenda.>>
now that you mention it, i have never seen this "dupper" character ever offer any advice at all. all he ever does is attempt to put down advice offered by the "naysayers" and offer none in return.
you, dupper, are a charlatan. |
| interesting point | Dupper
May 2, 2001 7:17 PM | | If I am giving no advise, or claims, how could I be a charlatan? That made lots of sense. I don't put down advice offered by the naysayers. I question the validity of it. Just as they question the validity of yaysayers. You must of missed threads where I say that both sides have valid points and questionable points. I've pointed out that sighted testing is obviously flawed, just as the published DBTs that I've seen have flaws. I gave my opinion, should I keep repeating it? I've stated how I choose my cables, should I keep repeating it? |
| interesting point | observer
May 3, 2001 4:18 AM | | simply asking "why" does not show intelligence.
children do that all the time.
that does not make them intelligent unless they process the information and feed back something of value.
children do that also.
you do not even do that.
you are simply trying to feign intelligence by constantly asking the same questions and misquoting.
then, when questioned you are proud to admit that you say nothing.
i cannot agree more. |
| interesting point | Dupper
May 3, 2001 7:39 PM | | Misquoted 1 time. And I owned up to it.
Marks intelligence was never questioned. His childish behavior was. So I'm not sure where you coming from with that defence. I give feed back. On cables, and on conduct. Of course, in Marks mind, and now yours, if my feedback on his and others conduct isn't to his liking, its of no value. Thats fine with me.
I may not have a controversial opinion on how I should buy my cables. I have a feeling you and Mark may have a problem with this, because you don't know how to deal with it. So you see that as no feedback and not of value. Or maybe because you can't drag me into this ongoing cable war.
Maybe you only see feedback as treating someone wrong because they disagree. I gather this because you are defending someone that does that.
When I was questioned, I said how I pick my cables, what else do you want? I admit to making no claims. Anything wrong with that? Let me take that back. Apparently there is, because anytime someone makes a claim, they are jumped on. So this is what you want? Me to make a claim? The only claim on cables I make is how I feel is the best way for ME to buy them. I stated in so many words before how I do it. If that is not feed back then I don't know what else you want. Other than to drag me into the fray on cables. Since I have no objection to people picking cables in whatever way they feel fit. My feeling is how important is it that they do? These are wires we are talking about, very, very small thing in this world. I guess I wouldn't be on either side now would I?
I do come in here to see some people post. Some of the knowledgable people like Resident Loser and Jon Risch, Monsterous Mike, Adi, estan, and even Mark when he is behaving. But conduct by some make it hard to resist to throw it back in their face. Thats just me. |
| Yep! Intellectual arm wrestling | Dupper
May 2, 2001 6:17 PM | | I've made my points on cables. Do I need to have you see me in a different light? No. Your just some guy on the internet, just like everyone else and me. I have no agenda either. I just don't like what I see, so I say something about it. I am not attacking you, I am throwing back what you and others do, in your face, and you don't like it. It may seem like an attack to you but its not. Attacking is calling people names and ganging up. When I see a group of yaysayers attacking a naysayer, I'll do the same. Until that happens, I have nothing to say about that. Don't know when that will be, because there doesn't seem to be a yaysayer clique. Just some individuals. I don't know how I am setting you up. I just call them as I see them. So that doesn't make sense to me. As far as being as brave on the net as in person... I guess that means you throw childish insults in person too? Exactly how old are you? Your last sentences mean nothing, anyone can say that on the internet. You say your a confrontational person... but from what it looks like you don't like to be confronted. So that makes no sense. I have no idea what FWIW is. |
| Yep! Intellectual arm wrestling | Markw*
May 3, 2001 6:40 AM | | "I have no idea what FWIW is."
Among many other things, but that doesn't seem to stop you from chiming in, does it?. |
| Can't say that I can | Dupper
Apr 30, 2001 9:18 PM | | Either one of what claims? Your posts don't make alot of sense. |
| With no data to refute points,Adi goes for ad hominem attack | mtrycrafts
Apr 28, 2001 9:56 PM | | >>>I have proof that I am here typing this message right now on my computer. <<<<
Not convincing at all. A proof? |
| 30' of #24 wire is about 1.5 ohms, | Norm Strong
Apr 28, 2001 1:16 PM | | This is significant, even with an 8 ohm speaker. It will result in a 1.5db increase at speaker resonance over what it would be with heavy wire. It also lowers the damping factor to 5. Even somebody like me should be able to hear that. :-) |
| Simple question...answer#1 | Dupper
Apr 26, 2001 5:58 PM | | LOL! |
| It doesn't take much to amuse you, does it? | Markw*
Apr 26, 2001 7:51 PM | | The funny thing is that estan is correct.
If you had bothered to read anything he has posted lately, both here and in other forums, you would know that he doesn't exactly subscribe to the "all cables are the same" philosophy that you so love mocking.
He is simply stating common knowledge which has generally been accepted as the truth. Commmon, at least, to those who in the scientific community know what the true facts are.
Facts are funny things. They can either forward or hinder your beliefs.
Also, from reading both his and your posts, I must assume that he was building (not just buying) equipment when you were merely a dribble on the inseam of your papa's trousers. |
| It doesn't take much to amuse you, does it? | estan
Apr 26, 2001 8:11 PM | | a premature dribble at that....oops! |
| It doesn't take much to amuse you, does it? | oozing abcess
Apr 26, 2001 8:44 PM | | I wouldn't put too much faith in the scientific community you know with all the flawed information leaked to the newspapers on a daily basis.The bright scientists(few and far between) actually work on projects that benefit humanity and I don't think speaker cables and interconnects are one of those projects. |
| It doesn't take much to amuse you, does it? | estan
Apr 26, 2001 9:07 PM | | isn't the term bright scientists a bit of an oxymoron?
Anyway I really have to question something here.
If you are willing to eliminate the fields of acoustics, telecommunications and all fields related to signal transfer throught whatever medium you might choose. Lets also eliminate all of the probable large scale building projects that might contain cable and interconnects such as a space shuttle, a nuclear attack submarine, an AWACS, the Dew Line early warning defense system, all of the electronic devices used by the medical community that work with transducers...gee this is fu@king ridiculus to even continue this list because I could be at it for a year and not even break the surface.
So just be thankful for the research that has been done to create a cabled environment that is actually allowing you to read this post. Truth is that the research that has been done on things as seemingly simple as cables might someday be keeping you alive or at the very least insuring your freedom to be heard on this forum....is this too big a scope for you to digest? |
| It doesn't take much to amuse you, does it? | oozing abcess
Apr 26, 2001 11:30 PM | | You know what smart guy,all the shit you listed off was invented years ago and you know what?use regular wire bought at home depot or general electric.As for acoustics,judging by the majority of terrible recordings You still haven't convinced me about any scientific leaps and bounds . |
| It doesn't take much to amuse you, does it? | estan
Apr 26, 2001 11:43 PM | | perhaps a long hot soak in some epsom salts might help your condition |
| Perhaps a wide, definitive I&D is in order | Eyespy
Apr 26, 2001 9:14 PM | | That usually solves the problem. Without one, all the antbiotics in the world may fail. Oh, the aftercare is also important. |
| Perhaps a wide, definitive I&D is in order | oozing abcess
Apr 26, 2001 11:52 PM | | The lance(incredible pain),the grin on the doctors face,the concerned look on the nurses face,The doctor then says "this is goin to hurt"I am thinking should I get transparent or radio shack...then the blade makes contact...Anne Murray starts playing over in my mind butI just bought the new Mudvayne CD.OOOOOOOOOOhhhhhhh!The doctor then says we have to go deeper...what a drag...I won't be listening to music in my sweetspot for a while. |
| Perhaps a wide, definitive I&D is in order | estan
Apr 27, 2001 12:09 AM | | if the epsom salts don't suck it out try Mediteranean sea salts for a few more bucks...and you gotta get Anne out of your mind or you'll never stop oozing. |
| It doesn't take much to amuse you, does it? | Dupper
Apr 26, 2001 9:24 PM | | Mark, take a break, what he said struck me as funny. Had nothing to do with this debate as to why I was laughing. Just a funny statement. Maybe you need to lay off whatever gets you all fired up. |
| It doesn't take much to amuse you, does it? | Dupper
Apr 26, 2001 9:29 PM | | And your the master of internet insults and bravery. I bow to you. |
| re: Interconnect test | Tom N.
Apr 27, 2001 7:21 AM | | Was I reading your posts correctly, that the IC that you always needed to reduce the sources output for was your prefered IC? And wasn't that the interconnect that contained no shielding? While the ones that didn't accuate the little light common IC's with shielding?
I ask, because since we don't know anything about how the indicator works, it is just as likely to be turned on whenever a preset voltage threshold is exceeded, probably with no more filtering then how fast the op-amp (I;m just guessing it is an op-amp) can respond to the change in voltage levels. As such I would imagine your on-shielded IC has quite a bit of noise on it, much more then your common shielded ICs yo used. This noise from who knows what type of interference, may not be able to be heard, but I bet a fast op-amp can react quite easily to it.
Anyway, interesting idea for a test, and it sounds like you had fun doing it! Thanks for the info!
Tom N. |
| re: Interconnect test | MajorDump
Apr 27, 2001 5:10 PM | | Hi Tom,
You got it backwards. My prefered IC was the one that caused the signal peak indicator to light. When the generics were in place, the signal peak indicator didn't light. As far as shielding goes, the generics are of the typical Radio Shack variety. I do not believe they are shielded.
The way the Peak indicator works is: It acts as a monitor for an analog audio input signal. If the selected analog audio input signal is greater than the capable level of internal processing, it will light. This is where the Attenuate button on the receiver comes in. When the peak indicator flashes you can press the Attenuate to reduce the level, or in my case and preference, use the cd players variable volume control.
I can play different CDs in the CD player and the light will not come on at full variable volumn on the cd player. I can assume that these cds were recorded at a lower level.
Thanks for your interest
MD |
| re: Interconnect test | Tom N.
Apr 27, 2001 5:43 PM | | Hi MD,
Thanks for the additioanl info.
As far as Iknow, all Radio Shack generic IC's for audio use are indeed shielded. They use the return as both the shield and the signal return as well as the ground current return.
The IC's that you normally use then are shielded or not?
If they are not shield I have an interesting idea for you if you wish to try it...
Take any other unshield IC that you may, or beg/barrow one. Heck if you are handy you can even make one out of some zip cord and RCA plugs. It would be interesting to see if another non-shielded cable will also cause your peak indicator to light.
If your preferred IC is shielded, well then forget my whole idea!
Have a great weekend.
Tom N. |
| re: Interconnect test | MajorDump
Apr 27, 2001 7:51 PM | | Even though there is no material shielding to my prefered ICs, the braid is RF rejecting. So in essence they are shielded. |
| |
