AudioBanter.com - View Single Post

On 6 Oct 2005 02:38:23 GMT, wrote:

Steven Sullivan wrote:

Not important at this point in the argument. Pinkerton denies that I
heard the difference. He cannot do that.

He denies you heard a real difference. He doesn't deny that you *think*
you heard a difference.

Proof?

He is correct, that is my position. Since you refuse to do a blind
test, you have no way of knowing which is true.

I heard a difference between the $100 and $50 Monster cables.

There is no contradicting this. The question is not IF, but rather WHY.

You 'heard' a difference. You don't *know* that it was really a difference
between the cables, you only *know* that you think you heard a differece.

Metaphysically equivalent.

But *physically*, not at all necessarily equivalent. Not all beliefs are true.

But in this case it does not matter. If it is IN PRINCIPLE impossible
to distinguish between:

A) A cable that ALWAYS sounds better because of something in the
listener
B) A cable that ALWAYS sounds better because of something in the cable

what difference does it make? The observed phenomena are the same.

Rather than being impossible, it is in fact very easy to make such a
distinction - you remove from the listener only the *knowledge* of
which cable is connected. If they remain distinguishable, then it's
something in the cable.

There are some things that we cannot
reliably distinguish above the 'noise' of our neuro systems and the
blood coursing through our veins. And there is always some ambient
noise (except in specially-treated, sound-deadened rooms). The answer,
then, lies in repeated listening over several days or even weeks, to
allow for the evening-out of our moods and neurological conditions. If
after enough trials I am satisfied that there is a difference and a
sufficient one), I buy the product.

No, that is not where the answer lies, because things *other than*
the actual sound can still highly influence the 'perception' -- enough
so that one can still come to the 100% wrong conclusion about whether
the sound is different or not.

Read my lips: It does not matter.

Perhaps not to you as part of a buying decision, but when you insist
on claiming - as you have done - that it's due to some audible
property of the cable, then you come unstuck.

The question is *IF* the difference was really between
the cables, or whether it was imaginary. It can also be posed as "WHY
did you perceive a difference"?

Correct. So, as in any scientific question, we use the process of
elimination. The fact that the difference was repeatable, over several
days, and that the alteranative explanation ('it's all in my head')
strains credulity, points to the cables themselves possessing a
different sound character.

It's Occam's razor time!

Wrong, because you underestimate or are ignorant of the power of
the psychological effects. *No* competent scientist, for example,
would consider the 'all in your head' explanation
to constitute 'straining credulity', under such conditions.

Proof?

More than a century of scientific study. You OTOH offer only your
conviction that if you heard it, it must be real. Not so, and easily
demonstrable to be not so.

Obviously, 'straining credulity' is not a sufficient criterion unless
you actually understand how likely things are. That two
people in a party of forty can readily have the same birthdate merely
by chance 'strains credulity' for people who have no clue about
probability -- such people are likely to think it 'means' something.

All that matters is my purchase.

So stop making claims about 'cable sound' for which you can provide
*zero* credible support.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering