I sent this email to: '

"Greetings,

I am an "audio quack" as you would put it. I can hear sonic differences
between amplifiers, CD players, even WIRE, speaker wire. Is your
challenge applicable to, for instance, speaker cables? The self made
speaker cables I am currently using (you are free to measure and examine
these using pink noise, etc, prior to putting them to the test) against
radioshack lamp cords. I am claiming that I can hear the difference as
to which is employed each and every time. Since "wire is wire" this must
fall into the realm of your challenge.

I do have my reservations though:

!) A revealing amplifier (densen beat b 100 mk5, for instance), high
quality speakers (sonus faber cremona floorstanders for instance) and a
decent CD player will be used to conduct the test.

!!) No abx comparator boxes in between, the wires should be interchanged
manually.

!!!) Someone I trust (but of course I will not have any sort of eye
contact, or any form of other contact with him/her duration of the test)
to actually observe that the wires are being changed (or not) and the
data recorded"


James Randi replied that:

"There are big differences between lamp cord and larger-gauge cable.
That's not the question, at all. Wire is not wire. I accept that."

More on "challenging the million dollar challenge" later. This post,
on a FYI basis.

"Fella" wrote in message

I sent this email to: '

"Greetings,

I am an "audio quack" as you would put it. I can hear sonic
differences between amplifiers, CD players, even WIRE, speaker wire.
Is your challenge applicable to, for instance, speaker cables? The
self made speaker cables I am currently using (you are free to
measure and examine these using pink noise, etc, prior to putting
them to the test) against radioshack lamp cords. I am claiming that I
can hear the difference as to which is employed each and every time.

Since "wire is wire" this must fall into the realm of your challenge.


Shows how little you understand about the "wire is wire" claim, Fella.
Nobody is saying that 36 gauge magnet wire when used as speaker cable will
sound just like 12 gauge heavy speaker wire. Well, apparently nobody but
you!

James Randi replied that:

"There are big differences between lamp cord and larger-gauge cable.
That's not the question, at all. Wire is not wire. I accept that."

Randi obviously knows that the "wire is wire" claim relates to wire of
similar size and length. But, it's quite clear that you don't, Fella.

So consider this a little friendly advice. "Wire is wire" applies to wires
of similar size and length.

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Fella" wrote in message


I sent this email to: '

"Greetings,

I am an "audio quack" as you would put it. I can hear sonic
differences between amplifiers, CD players, even WIRE, speaker wire.
Is your challenge applicable to, for instance, speaker cables? The
self made speaker cables I am currently using (you are free to
measure and examine these using pink noise, etc, prior to putting
them to the test) against radioshack lamp cords. I am claiming that I
can hear the difference as to which is employed each and every time.


Since "wire is wire" this must fall into the realm of your challenge.



Shows how little you understand about the "wire is wire" claim, Fella.

None of that cocky attitude now you cockhead ****! If you are going to
addrss me you better mind your manners or I will beat the living ****
out of that soulless ****borg existence of yours (virtualy that is
just as before so watch it.

Nobody is saying that 36 gauge magnet wire when used as speaker cable will
sound just like 12 gauge heavy speaker wire.

He never asked anything about gauge or length, or any magnets therein. I
can also hear the HUUUUUUGE difference between stock rca connectors and
audioquest anacondas, for instance, both of them being one meter in
length. So could you, if you would teach yourself to listen.


Well, apparently nobody but
you!

Mind your manners you **** of a dumbduck. Besides, why the anger? Why
the exclamation marks?? If I am missing some obvious point that
everybody else knows shouldn't you be sneering and making jackal
hounding laughing noises, making fun of me?? WHY THE ANGER YOU ****!?!?!



James Randi replied that:

"There are big differences between lamp cord and larger-gauge cable.
That's not the question, at all. Wire is not wire. I accept that."


Randi obviously knows that the "wire is wire" claim relates to wire of
similar size and length.


You are full of horse**** you ****. Size or length was not mentioned
there! How do you know, or Randi for that matter, what is the "gauge" of
my speaker wire that I am putting up against radio shack lamp cord? HOW
THE F.CK DO YOU KNOW THAT FROM THE TRANSACTION QUOTED ABOVE!!!

Insulation, the material used for insulation, strand interaction is hell
of a lot important with speaker wire.

I just debunked the "wire is wire" bull****, that's it. The reason for
your chihuahua anger.

But, it's quite clear that you don't, Fella.


You have the credibility of a cockroach, now more then ever, you know
that don't you?


So consider this a little friendly advice. "Wire is wire" applies to wires
of similar size and length.


LOL! When the "challenge" is challenged there seems to be no end in
excuses.

"Wire is wire when both wires are same gauge radio shack lamp cords
fellaaaaa, you should know that fellaaaaaa" LOL! What a load of bull****!

Yeah, this is only the beginning. The "wire is wire" borg notion is
hereby DEBUNKED! As Randi says: "Wire is not wire. I accept that."

Ok, ferstler, cockroach of a krueger, the terrosists or whatever
terrorist brown shirts, start barking y'all. :=)


NOTE: I have asked and received full confirmation from James Randi that
I can quote him. Examining what the challenge is about, even some
aspects that touch the audio scene, I am fully supportive of it, the
million dollar challenge, the idea behind it. Used against TV
evangelists, for instance, or the likes of the ****borg, it is a
worthwhile endeavour.

My only aim is to debunk some borgs lurking around here who think that
with a pink noise generator, a misunderstanding of what psychoacustics
is all about, a db meter, or whatever primitive lab-rat device they can
pre-determine what my ears can or cannot hear, remotely. LOL!

"Fella" wrote in message

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Fella" wrote in message


I sent this email to: '

"Greetings,

I am an "audio quack" as you would put it. I can hear sonic
differences between amplifiers, CD players, even WIRE, speaker wire.
Is your challenge applicable to, for instance, speaker cables? The
self made speaker cables I am currently using (you are free to
measure and examine these using pink noise, etc, prior to putting
them to the test) against radioshack lamp cords. I am claiming that
I can hear the difference as to which is employed each and every
time.


Since "wire is wire" this must fall into the realm of your
challenge.



Shows how little you understand about the "wire is wire" claim,
Fella.

gratuitous profanity, namecalling and posturing deleted

Nobody is saying that 36 gauge magnet wire when used as speaker
cable will sound just like 12 gauge heavy speaker wire.

He never asked anything about gauge or length, or any magnets
therein.

He made the mistake of presuming that you had a brain, Fella.

irrelevant boasting and posturing deleted

Well, apparently nobody but
you!

gratuitous profanity, namecalling and posturing deleted


James Randi replied that:

"There are big differences between lamp cord and larger-gauge cable.
That's not the question, at all. Wire is not wire. I accept that."

Randi obviously knows that the "wire is wire" claim relates to wire
of similar size and length.

gratuitous profanity, namecalling and posturing deleted

Size or length was not mentioned there!

He made the mistake of presuming that you had a drop of common sense, Fella.

How do you know, or Randi for that matter, what is the "gauge"
of my speaker wire that I am putting up against radio shack lamp
cord?

gratuitous profanity, namecalling and posturing deleted

He made the mistake of presuming that you had a brain, Fella.

Insulation, the material used for insulation, strand interaction is
hell of a lot important with speaker wire.

Really?

I just debunked the "wire is wire" bull****, that's it.

The reason for your chihuahua anger.

What anger?

But, it's quite clear that you don't, Fella.

gratuitous namecalling and posturing deleted

So consider this a little friendly advice. "Wire is wire" applies to
wires of similar size and length.

LOL! When the "challenge" is challenged there seems to be no end in
excuses.

Whatever.

"Wire is wire when both wires are same gauge radio shack lamp cords
fellaaaaa, you should know that fellaaaaaa" LOL! What a load of
bull****!

Yeah, this is only the beginning. The "wire is wire" borg notion is
hereby DEBUNKED! As Randi says: "Wire is not wire. I accept that."

Yawn

gratuitous namecalling and posturing deleted

My only aim is to debunk some borgs lurking around here who think that
with a pink noise generator, a misunderstanding of what psychoacustics
is all about, a db meter, or whatever primitive lab-rat device they
can pre-determine what my ears can or cannot hear, remotely. LOL!

zzzzzzzzzzzzzz!

Arny Krueger wrote:



gratuitous profanity, namecalling and posturing deleted



The ****borg calls this (for instance) : "I can also hear the HUUUUUUGE
difference between stock rca connectors and audioquest anacondas, for
instance, both of them being one meter in length. So could you, if you
would teach yourself to listen."

"gratuitous profanity, namecalling and posturing"


I think the "audioquest" bit was the profanity part, yes?



Insulation, the material used for insulation, strand interaction is
hell of a lot important with speaker wire.


Really?


Really. Live and learn ****borg.




zzzzzzzzzzzzzz!



That's right, go to sleep, you haven't been debunked, it's all a bad
dream, everything will be as same when you wake up tomorrow.

"Fella" wrote in message
...
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Fella" wrote in message


I sent this email to: '

"Greetings,

I am an "audio quack" as you would put it. I can hear sonic
differences between amplifiers, CD players, even WIRE, speaker wire.
Is your challenge applicable to, for instance, speaker cables? The
self made speaker cables I am currently using (you are free to
measure and examine these using pink noise, etc, prior to putting
them to the test) against radioshack lamp cords. I am claiming that I
can hear the difference as to which is employed each and every time.


Since "wire is wire" this must fall into the realm of your challenge.



Shows how little you understand about the "wire is wire" claim, Fella.

None of that cocky attitude now you cockhead ****! If you are going to
addrss me you better mind your manners or I will beat the living **** out
of that soulless ****borg existence of yours (virtualy that is just as
before so watch it.

Nobody is saying that 36 gauge magnet wire when used as speaker cable
will sound just like 12 gauge heavy speaker wire.

He never asked anything about gauge or length, or any magnets therein. I
can also hear the HUUUUUUGE difference between stock rca connectors and
audioquest anacondas, for instance, both of them being one meter in
length. So could you, if you would teach yourself to listen.


Well, apparently nobody but you!

Mind your manners you **** of a dumbduck. Besides, why the anger? Why the
exclamation marks?? If I am missing some obvious point that everybody else
knows shouldn't you be sneering and making jackal hounding laughing
noises, making fun of me?? WHY THE ANGER YOU ****!?!?!



James Randi replied that:

"There are big differences between lamp cord and larger-gauge cable.
That's not the question, at all. Wire is not wire. I accept that."


Randi obviously knows that the "wire is wire" claim relates to wire of
similar size and length.


You are full of horse**** you ****. Size or length was not mentioned
there! How do you know, or Randi for that matter, what is the "gauge" of
my speaker wire that I am putting up against radio shack lamp cord? HOW
THE F.CK DO YOU KNOW THAT FROM THE TRANSACTION QUOTED ABOVE!!!

Insulation, the material used for insulation, strand interaction is hell
of a lot important with speaker wire.

I just debunked the "wire is wire" bull****, that's it. The reason for
your chihuahua anger.


No you only said you did. You could listen to all the wire you want to
through any speakers you want to and if you do it without kowing which is
which at any given moment, Randi is going to keep his money.

But, it's quite clear that you don't, Fella.


You have the credibility of a cockroach, now more then ever, you know that
don't you?

And your credibilty is established where, aside from profanity and name
calling.

So consider this a little friendly advice. "Wire is wire" applies to
wires of similar size and length.


LOL! When the "challenge" is challenged there seems to be no end in
excuses.

Bull****, you do a wire test at home with a friend, as long as it's actually
blind, you'll find you're a whole lot deafer than you thought.

"Wire is wire when both wires are same gauge radio shack lamp cords
fellaaaaa, you should know that fellaaaaaa" LOL! What a load of bull****!

Yeah, this is only the beginning. The "wire is wire" borg notion is hereby
DEBUNKED! As Randi says: "Wire is not wire. I accept that."


NOTE: I have asked and received full confirmation from James Randi that I
can quote him. Examining what the challenge is about, even some aspects
that touch the audio scene, I am fully supportive of it, the million
dollar challenge, the idea behind it. Used against TV evangelists, for
instance, or the likes of the ****borg, it is a worthwhile endeavour.

My only aim is to debunk some borgs lurking around here who think that
with a pink noise generator, a misunderstanding of what psychoacustics is
all about, a db meter, or whatever primitive lab-rat device they can
pre-determine what my ears can or cannot hear, remotely. LOL!

Good luck, you'll need it.

Michael McKelvy wrote:


You could listen to all the wire you want to
through any speakers you want to and if you do it without kowing which is
which at any given moment, Randi is going to keep his money.


Anybody know mickeymcmcish? Need some translation here.



Bull****, you do a wire test at home with a friend, as long as it's actually
blind, you'll find you're a whole lot deafer than you thought.


Mcmickey predicts the future.

"Fella" wrote in message
...
Michael McKelvy wrote:


You could listen to all the wire you want to through any speakers you
want to and if you do it without kowing which is which at any given
moment, Randi is going to keep his money.


Anybody know mickeymcmcish? Need some translation here.



Bull****, you do a wire test at home with a friend, as long as it's
actually blind, you'll find you're a whole lot deafer than you thought.


Mcmickey predicts the future.


Wire is wire.

"Fella" wrote in message

Michael McKelvy wrote:

You could listen to all the wire you want to
through any speakers you want to and if you do it without kowing
which is which at any given moment, Randi is going to keep his money.

Anybody know mickeymcmcish? Need some translation here.

Typical *Normal* BS - either they are dumber than fence posts, or they
pretend they can't read things that say things they don't like to hear.

Bull****, you do a wire test at home with a friend, as long as it's
actually blind, you'll find you're a whole lot deafer than you
thought.

Mcmickey predicts the future.

It's a prediction of the obvious. BTW Fella, I predict that if you jump off
a Freeway bridge, you'll probably not improve your health. Sue me for
predicting the future!

"Michael McKelvy" wrote in message
news

"Fella" wrote in message
...
Michael McKelvy wrote:


You could listen to all the wire you want to through any speakers you
want to and if you do it without kowing which is which at any given
moment, Randi is going to keep his money.


Anybody know mickeymcmcish? Need some translation here.



Bull****, you do a wire test at home with a friend, as long as it's
actually blind, you'll find you're a whole lot deafer than you thought.


Mcmickey predicts the future.


Wire is wire.

Bugs are bugs.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...


It's a prediction of the obvious. BTW Fella, I predict that if you jump
off a Freeway bridge, you'll probably not improve your health. Sue me for
predicting the future!


I'll probably sue you.

George M. Middius said:



Clyde Slick said:

Sue me

I'll probably sue you.

That may not be necessary. Once the King Kong Toilet is delivered, we'll be
able to try flushing him away.

Thank's Messiaen for admittiong you're fecal obsession, LoT;^ S!

If iron turds killed, LOL!

--
Sander de Waal
" SOA of a KT88? Sufficient. "

Michael McKelvy wrote:
"Fella" wrote in message
...

Michael McKelvy wrote:



You could listen to all the wire you want to through any speakers you
want to and if you do it without kowing which is which at any given
moment, Randi is going to keep his money.


Anybody know mickeymcmcish? Need some translation here.




Bull****, you do a wire test at home with a friend, as long as it's
actually blind, you'll find you're a whole lot deafer than you thought.


Mcmickey predicts the future.



Wire is wire.



Mmmmmmmmm... me so angry now.

Arny Krueger wrote:

"Fella" wrote in message


Michael McKelvy wrote:


You could listen to all the wire you want to
through any speakers you want to and if you do it without kowing
which is which at any given moment, Randi is going to keep his money.


Anybody know mickeymcmcish? Need some translation here.


Typical *Normal* BS - either they are dumber than fence posts, or they
pretend they can't read things that say things they don't like to hear..

Translate it then you ****. Break the sentence into some logical
components. If I listen to speakers and wires without knowing if a
speaker is a wire or wire a speaker randi keeps his money. Tell me ****,
what the **** did mickeymickey the resident dumdum say.

THE MAN HIMSELF ADMITTED THAT THE CHALLENGE DOESN'T INVOLVE
WIREEEEEEEE!!!!!!

You ****.

Ok, now go look up some syndrome from google, there, some mental
masturbation, go for it, the third link, copy-paste, that a boy.



Bull****, you do a wire test at home with a friend, as long as it's
actually blind, you'll find you're a whole lot deafer than you
thought.


Mcmickey predicts the future.


It's a prediction of the obvious. BTW Fella, I predict that if you jump off
a Freeway bridge, you'll probably not improve your health.

We'll see. I *will* admit it here, without *any* reservations if I am
not able to hear *every single time*!! the difference between radioshack
lamp cord and my speaker cables.

Sue me for
predicting the future!


I am gonna sue you for the mere fact that you exist you ****. Everything
has a price. You *will* eventually pay the price of all this pollution.

"Fella" wrote in message


THE MAN HIMSELF ADMITTED THAT THE CHALLENGE DOESN'T INVOLVE
WIREEEEEEEE!!!!!!

Yes Fella, your command of the intensely obvious is at least profoundly
backward instead of its usual total irrelevancy. The original Randi
challenge was about Shatki devices, to bring you back up to your usual
half-wit half-speed.

"Arny Krueger" said:

Yes Fella, your command of the intensely obvious is at least profoundly
backward instead of its usual total irrelevancy.

In English please?

The original Randi
challenge was about Shatki devices, to bring you back up to your usual
half-wit half-speed.

I did a Google about "Shatki devices", and came up empty.
We can therefor conclude that your claim is false.

;-)

--
Sander de Waal
" SOA of a KT88? Sufficient. "

"Clyde Slick" said:

The original Randi
challenge was about Shatki devices, to bring you back up to your usual
half-wit half-speed.

I did a Google about "Shatki devices", and came up empty.
We can therefor conclude that your claim is false.

;-)


Google lies!!


Not to me.

BTW it's Goggle in Arnold-speak.

--
Sander de Waal
" SOA of a KT88? Sufficient. "

"Sander deWaal" wrote in message
...
"Arny Krueger" said:

Yes Fella, your command of the intensely obvious is at least profoundly
backward instead of its usual total irrelevancy.

In English please?

The original Randi
challenge was about Shatki devices, to bring you back up to your usual
half-wit half-speed.

I did a Google about "Shatki devices", and came up empty.
We can therefor conclude that your claim is false.

;-)


Google lies!!

Arny Krueger wrote:

"Fella" wrote in message


THE MAN HIMSELF ADMITTED THAT THE CHALLENGE DOESN'T INVOLVE
WIREEEEEEEE!!!!!!


Yes Fella, your command of the intensely obvious is at least profoundly
backward instead of its usual total irrelevancy.


Ok, mcmickey, here boy, since the ****borg understands you, it might be
so that you understand the ****borg. Translate boy... But wait, then I'd
need the ****borg to translate what you translate from the ****borg.
Hmmm.. Nevermind.

The original Randi
challenge was about Shatki devices, to bring you back up to your usual
half-wit half-speed.


Well since wire is wire I thought I'd give it a shot now.


Shatki you say, google says "did you mean shakti devices" .. And
"devices" you say ... What is it that makes a piece of stone not able to
do anyting else but have weight, be called a "device". Magic bricks you
say!

We'll see.

"Fella" wrote in message

Arny Krueger wrote:

"Fella" wrote in message


THE MAN HIMSELF ADMITTED THAT THE CHALLENGE DOESN'T INVOLVE
WIREEEEEEEE!!!!!!


Yes Fella, your command of the intensely obvious is at least
profoundly backward instead of its usual total irrelevancy.


Ok, mcmickey, here boy, since the ****borg understands you, it might
be so that you understand the ****borg. Translate boy... But wait,
then I'd need the ****borg to translate what you translate from the
****borg. Hmmm.. Nevermind.

Fella uses a lot of words to say absolutely nothing part dos.

Fella uses a lot of words to say absolutely nothing part uno.

The original Randi
challenge was about Shatki devices, to bring you back up to your
usual half-wit half-speed.


Well since wire is wire I thought I'd give it a shot now.


Shatki you say, google says "did you mean shakti devices" .. And
"devices" you say ... What is it that makes a piece of stone not able
to do anyting else but have weight, be called a "device". Magic
bricks you say!

Fella uses a lot of words to say absolutely nothing part tres.

We'll see.

See what? Ya ain't said nuttin' yet, bozo!

Arny Krueger wrote:



Fella uses a lot of words to say absolutely nothing part dos.

Fella uses a lot of words to say absolutely nothing part uno.


Fella uses a lot of words to say absolutely nothing part tres.


Ok, the ****borg counts from one - to - three : he says : two .. one
... three!

The ****borg wanted to show us his language skills. But the google
copy-paste squence went wrong.


We'll see.


See what? Ya ain't said nuttin' yet, bozo!


We'll see; Keep that gaping wIIIIde open asshole of yours gaping, stay
tuned, that is, I'm gonna send you the same horse I sent to mickmickey
down to his gloryhole post.

Yea yea, I know, you will note something about now. Ok, noted.

"Sander deWaal" wrote in message
...

BTW it's Goggle in Arnold-speak.

--

Cause it keeps the **** out of his eyes.

"Fella" wrote in message
...

Ok, the ****borg counts from one - to - three : he says : two .. one ..
three!


Kroomath is a valid subset of Krooligic.
Krooger scored 800/800 on his Krap (Krooger Religious Aptitude Profile),
note.

It's my experience that there are slight audible differences between
speaker wires of sufficiently hefty gauge, or ampacity, and of commonly
used lengths, but that those differences have no connection to price
whatever and that products available from electrical supply stores are
as good, overall, as products specifically marketed for high end audio
use.

In the field of interconnects there is IMO more variability, but
again, there is no benefit from using more than modestly priced
products. In particular RCA connectors, of any price or construction,
are a bigger "choke point" than any wire of reasonable construction and
getting rid of them in favor of any of several alternatives is the
first step to sonic improvement.

These are things I have observed in many years of experimentation and
evaluation, some of it in "informal blind" settings, and I believe they
will stand up to the most rigorous double-blind evaluation. However,
final proof of this will only be when it's done. I believe it sould be
done, although I'm not inclined to finance the testing.

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 18:01:02 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"Fella" wrote in message

Arny Krueger wrote:

"Fella" wrote in message


THE MAN HIMSELF ADMITTED THAT THE CHALLENGE DOESN'T INVOLVE
WIREEEEEEEE!!!!!!


Yes Fella, your command of the intensely obvious is at least
profoundly backward instead of its usual total irrelevancy.


Ok, mcmickey, here boy, since the ****borg understands you, it might
be so that you understand the ****borg. Translate boy... But wait,
then I'd need the ****borg to translate what you translate from the
****borg. Hmmm.. Nevermind.

Fella uses a lot of words to say absolutely nothing part dos.

Fella uses a lot of words to say absolutely nothing part uno.

The original Randi
challenge was about Shatki devices, to bring you back up to your
usual half-wit half-speed.


Well since wire is wire I thought I'd give it a shot now.


Shatki you say, google says "did you mean shakti devices" .. And
"devices" you say ... What is it that makes a piece of stone not able
to do anyting else but have weight, be called a "device". Magic
bricks you say!

Fella uses a lot of words to say absolutely nothing part tres.

We'll see.

See what? Ya ain't said nuttin' yet, bozo!

Notice how much trouble Arnold has simply counting to three.

On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 01:58:20 +0200, Fella wrote:

Arny Krueger wrote:



Fella uses a lot of words to say absolutely nothing part dos.

Fella uses a lot of words to say absolutely nothing part uno.


Fella uses a lot of words to say absolutely nothing part tres.


Ok, the ****borg counts from one - to - three : he says : two .. one
.. three!

Ooops, beaten to the punch.

"Fella" wrote in message
...
Michael McKelvy wrote:
"Fella" wrote in message
...

Michael McKelvy wrote:



You could listen to all the wire you want to through any speakers you
want to and if you do it without kowing which is which at any given
moment, Randi is going to keep his money.


Anybody know mickeymcmcish? Need some translation here.




Bull****, you do a wire test at home with a friend, as long as it's
actually blind, you'll find you're a whole lot deafer than you thought.


Mcmickey predicts the future.



Wire is wire.

Mmmmmmmmm... me so angry now.

Why, you will eventually prove what I said to yourself, if you're honest.

wrote in message
oups.com...





It's my experience that there are slight audible differences between
speaker wires of sufficiently hefty gauge, or ampacity, and of commonly
used lengths, but that those differences have no connection to price
whatever and that products available from electrical supply stores are
as good, overall, as products specifically marketed for high end audio
use.

I once use speaker wires from Radio Shack, and then later on I replace
it with Midnight cables from Audioquest. The most immediate improvement
I noticed was in midrange which become more involving to listen to, with
more presence in vocals and less harshness overall. Midbass became
more solid and well define, the lower bass went deeper with better
articulation-- I easily felt that difference.


In the field of interconnects there is IMO more variability, but
again, there is no benefit from using more than modestly priced
products. In particular RCA connectors, of any price or construction,
are a bigger "choke point" than any wire of reasonable construction and
getting rid of them in favor of any of several alternatives is the
first step to sonic improvement.

In the real world, hobbyist have to choose from rca or xlr connectors.
Comparing modestly priced interconnects from RS or Home Depot,
I heard great sonic improvements in my system having tried and use
interconnects from Audioquest, Wireworld, Cardas, etc. Among the
improvements were the qualities I mentioned above.


These are things I have observed in many years of experimentation and
evaluation, some of it in "informal blind" settings, and I believe they
will stand up to the most rigorous double-blind evaluation. However,
final proof of this will only be when it's done. I believe it sould be
done, although I'm not inclined to finance the testing.


Double blind again? You seem to believe they're effective, do you really?
How so?

"JBorg" wrote in message
m

Double blind again? You seem to believe they're effective, do you
really? How so?

It's obvious to just about everybody with a brain, which is why you can't
see this obvious point, Borgma.

Obviously, he hasn't yet been brainwashed by the *Normals*. I predict that
it will happen.

JBorg wrote:


Double blind again? You seem to believe they're effective, do you really?
How so?


We did a double-blind test on audioquest 3.3 ac power cord attached to
the densen amp as against a stock power cord, just yesterday evening. I
was the test subject. A friend helped.

While I was away from the hifi room the friend changed, or not, the cord
employed (all during the amp volume was not touched, the amp is always
on a ready to use state, the only on-off switch with it is in the back)
and wrote what he did to his paper, as in, 1: AQ käytössä (finnish for
"AQ in use") He then leaved the room and went to the adjacent room,
closed the door. We had agreed that he makes always sounds of plugging
and unplugging from wall outlet regardles of changing or not. Also, he
takes exactly one minute to do so, then leaves the room. I never saw his
face all during the test (lest I sense what he did ) I came over from
the living room to the hifi room and pressed play (the number 7 on the
remote to be exact). I could not see the outlet or the cord in between
because we covered it all up with the gigantic pillows from the living
room couch (yes yes, I have an understanding wife ) ...

Now what the AQ power cord does to the densen is that it makes it a
rock-n-roll jukebox bass thumping and pumping machine, as opposed to it
being this fluid, sweet midrange romantic type of amp otherwise. So for
all practical purposes my friend could have left the light on in the
room, or off, and I was to determine that.

We did the experiment 15 times, I new all without a mistake. It was
enough that I listened to the first ten seconds or so of song number 7
of buena vista social club with ry cooder disk. The bass there is
normally soft, very much in the background with a good system, but with
the AQ attached to the densen it is almost boomy and compressed (the AQ
also gives extra shine to the tweeters, all in all, almost a cheap
loudness effect to an amp that doesn't even have tone controls!).

So yes, double blind or not, if the differences are there they will be
there at any given time. The key is that the test should not intimidate.

More on this later, as I will be contacting, hopefully, Mr Randi for one
other type of component also.

Fella wrote:

JBorg wrote:


Double blind again? You seem to believe they're effective, do you
really?
How so?


We did a double-blind test on audioquest 3.3 ac power cord attached to
the densen amp as against a stock power cord, just yesterday evening. I
was the test subject. A friend helped.

While I was away from the hifi room the friend changed, or not, the cord
employed (all during the amp volume was not touched, the amp is always
on a ready to use state, the only on-off switch with it is in the back)
and wrote what he did to his paper, as in, 1: AQ käytössä (finnish for
"AQ in use") He then leaved the room and went to the adjacent room,
closed the door. We had agreed that he makes always sounds of plugging
and unplugging from wall outlet regardles of changing or not. Also, he
takes exactly one minute to do so, then leaves the room. I never saw his
face all during the test (lest I sense what he did ) I came over from
the living room to the hifi room and pressed play (the number 7 on the
remote to be exact). I could not see the outlet or the cord in between
because we covered it all up with the gigantic pillows from the living
room couch (yes yes, I have an understanding wife ) ...

Now what the AQ power cord does to the densen is that it makes it a
rock-n-roll jukebox bass thumping and pumping machine, as opposed to it
being this fluid, sweet midrange romantic type of amp otherwise. So for
all practical purposes my friend could have left the light on in the
room, or off, and I was to determine that.

We did the experiment 15 times, I new all without a mistake. It was
enough that I listened to the first ten seconds or so of song number 7
of buena vista social club with ry cooder disk. The bass there is
normally soft, very much in the background with a good system, but with
the AQ attached to the densen it is almost boomy and compressed (the AQ
also gives extra shine to the tweeters, all in all, almost a cheap
loudness effect to an amp that doesn't even have tone controls!).

So yes, double blind or not, if the differences are there they will be
there at any given time. The key is that the test should not intimidate.

More on this later, as I will be contacting, hopefully, Mr Randi for one
other type of component also.

I should add that I had a paper of my own, I wrote my observations, as
in 1: AQ, yes, 2: AQ, yes, etc.. At the end of 15 sessions we simply
matched the papers.

Arny Krueger" wrote
JBorg" wrote




Double blind again? You seem to believe they're effective, do you
really? How so?

It's obvious to just about everybody with a brain, which is why you can't see
this obvious point, Borgma.

Obviously, he hasn't yet been brainwashed by the *Normals*. I predict that it
will happen.


Normals don't brainwash anybody. If I try a pair of interconnects and didn't
like it, it goes back.

"Fella" wrote in message

Fella wrote:

JBorg wrote:


Double blind again? You seem to believe they're effective, do you
really?
How so?


We did a double-blind test on audioquest 3.3 ac power cord attached
to the densen amp as against a stock power cord, just yesterday
evening. I was the test subject. A friend helped.

While I was away from the hifi room the friend changed, or not, the
cord employed (all during the amp volume was not touched, the amp is
always on a ready to use state, the only on-off switch with it is in
the back) and wrote what he did to his paper, as in, 1: AQ käytössä
(finnish for "AQ in use") He then leaved the room and went to the
adjacent room, closed the door. We had agreed that he makes always
sounds of plugging and unplugging from wall outlet regardles of
changing or not. Also, he takes exactly one minute to do so, then
leaves the room. I never saw his face all during the test (lest I
sense what he did ) I came over from the living room to the hifi
room and pressed play (the number 7 on the remote to be exact). I
could not see the outlet or the cord in between because we covered
it all up with the gigantic pillows from the living room couch (yes
yes, I have an understanding wife ) ... Now what the AQ power cord
does to the densen is that it makes it a
rock-n-roll jukebox bass thumping and pumping machine, as opposed to
it being this fluid, sweet midrange romantic type of amp otherwise.
So for all practical purposes my friend could have left the light on
in the room, or off, and I was to determine that.

We did the experiment 15 times, I new all without a mistake. It was
enough that I listened to the first ten seconds or so of song number
7 of buena vista social club with ry cooder disk. The bass there is
normally soft, very much in the background with a good system, but
with the AQ attached to the densen it is almost boomy and compressed
(the AQ also gives extra shine to the tweeters, all in all, almost a
cheap loudness effect to an amp that doesn't even have tone
controls!). So yes, double blind or not, if the differences are there
they will
be there at any given time. The key is that the test should not
intimidate. More on this later, as I will be contacting, hopefully, Mr
Randi for
one other type of component also.

I should add that I had a paper of my own, I wrote my observations, as
in 1: AQ, yes, 2: AQ, yes, etc.. At the end of 15 sessions we simply
matched the papers.

OK, so the stock power cord was broken.

"JBorg" wrote in message
m
Arny Krueger" wrote
JBorg" wrote

Double blind again? You seem to believe they're effective, do you
really? How so?

It's obvious to just about everybody with a brain, which is why you
can't see this obvious point, Borgma.

Obviously, he hasn't yet been brainwashed by the *Normals*. I
predict that it will happen.

Normals don't brainwash anybody.

Middius' unending hateful posting, private email and phone calls isn't
brainwashing?

LOL!

If I try a pair of interconnects and didn't like it, it goes back.

Same for me only usually, I'm smart enough to leave the bad ones in the
store.

Arny Krueger wrote:

"Fella" wrote in message


Fella wrote:


JBorg wrote:


Double blind again? You seem to believe they're effective, do you
really?
How so?


We did a double-blind test on audioquest 3.3 ac power cord attached
to the densen amp as against a stock power cord, just yesterday
evening. I was the test subject. A friend helped.

While I was away from the hifi room the friend changed, or not, the
cord employed (all during the amp volume was not touched, the amp is
always on a ready to use state, the only on-off switch with it is in
the back) and wrote what he did to his paper, as in, 1: AQ käytössä
(finnish for "AQ in use") He then leaved the room and went to the
adjacent room, closed the door. We had agreed that he makes always
sounds of plugging and unplugging from wall outlet regardles of
changing or not. Also, he takes exactly one minute to do so, then
leaves the room. I never saw his face all during the test (lest I
sense what he did ) I came over from the living room to the hifi
room and pressed play (the number 7 on the remote to be exact). I
could not see the outlet or the cord in between because we covered
it all up with the gigantic pillows from the living room couch (yes
yes, I have an understanding wife ) ... Now what the AQ power cord
does to the densen is that it makes it a
rock-n-roll jukebox bass thumping and pumping machine, as opposed to
it being this fluid, sweet midrange romantic type of amp otherwise.
So for all practical purposes my friend could have left the light on
in the room, or off, and I was to determine that.

We did the experiment 15 times, I new all without a mistake. It was
enough that I listened to the first ten seconds or so of song number
7 of buena vista social club with ry cooder disk. The bass there is
normally soft, very much in the background with a good system, but
with the AQ attached to the densen it is almost boomy and compressed
(the AQ also gives extra shine to the tweeters, all in all, almost a
cheap loudness effect to an amp that doesn't even have tone
controls!). So yes, double blind or not, if the differences are there
they will
be there at any given time. The key is that the test should not
intimidate. More on this later, as I will be contacting, hopefully, Mr
Randi for
one other type of component also.


I should add that I had a paper of my own, I wrote my observations, as
in 1: AQ, yes, 2: AQ, yes, etc.. At the end of 15 sessions we simply
matched the papers.


OK, so the stock power cord was broken.



Ok, remote diagnosis. I see.

How can a power cord be "broken" and relay the power at the same time?
Shuko, or something or other, it's just the standart cord that cam with
the densen on first purchase.

Besides, I am using the "broken" cord since I totaly dislike what the AQ
cord does to an otherwise sweet amp (it turns it into some classe type
of a beast, though it does wonders for the cambridge CD, but, that's
another story.).

"Fella" wrote in message

Arny Krueger wrote:

OK, so the stock power cord was broken.

Ok, remote diagnosis. I see.

How can a power cord be "broken" and relay the power at the same time?

I believe you said that the stock power cord made the amplifier sound bad.

Normally, the Densen amp you were listening sounds pretty good. You said it
sounded bad with the stock power cord, ergo the stock power cord was
defective.

Shuko, or something or other, it's just the standart cord that cam
with the densen on first purchase.

Power cords can be a little bad or a lot bad. A high-resistance failure can
vastly reduce, but not eliminate the power available to the unit.

Besides, I am using the "broken" cord since I totaly dislike what the
AQ cord does to an otherwise sweet amp (it turns it into some classe
type of a beast, though it does wonders for the cambridge CD, but,
that's another story.).

You said:

" Now what the AQ power cord does to the densen is that it makes it a
rock-n-roll jukebox bass thumping and pumping machine, as opposed to it
being this fluid, sweet midrange romantic type of amp otherwise."

Actually, I interpret this as suggesting that in fact both power cords may
be defective. Or, depending on what one thinks about "rock-n-roll jukebox
bass" (preferences are personal, right?) that might be a good thing.

Since you tried to do a DBT, I think you ought to follow "Ten (10)
Requirements For Sensitive and Reliable Listening Tests" as posted at
http://www.pcabx.com/ . Pay special attention to item 5, and this applies to
both power cords.

Arny Krueger wrote




If I try a pair of interconnects and didn't like it, it goes back.

Same for me only usually, I'm smart enough to leave the bad ones in the store.


Since you didn't had a chance to audition it, did you leave it behind 'cause
you can't afford it ?

Arny Krueger wrote:

"Fella" wrote in message


Arny Krueger wrote:


OK, so the stock power cord was broken.


Ok, remote diagnosis. I see.


How can a power cord be "broken" and relay the power at the same time?


I believe you said that the stock power cord made the amplifier sound bad.

No I didn't. With stock cord the amp is balanced, wide, detailed, sweet
midrange (where music happens). With the AQ the loudness effect, yuck.


Normally, the Densen amp you were listening sounds pretty good.


You said it
sounded bad with the stock power cord,

No I didn't.

ergo the stock power cord was
defective.

No it isn't. It's still shiny new as the densen is, mickeymckmickey type
of a person never swung it in air, for instance, to hear what it sounds
like.



Shuko, or something or other, it's just the standart cord that cam
with the densen on first purchase.


You said:

" Now what the AQ power cord does to the densen is that it makes it a
rock-n-roll jukebox bass thumping and pumping machine, as opposed to it
being this fluid, sweet midrange romantic type of amp otherwise."

Actually, I interpret this as suggesting that in fact both power cords may
be defective.

Your interpretation is wrong. The AQ is just a mismatch with the densen,
that's all. It does wonders to the midrange detail when applied to the
Cambridge audio azur 640c CD player, for instance.

Or, depending on what one thinks about "rock-n-roll jukebox
bass" (preferences are personal, right?) that might be a good thing.

Maybe for some, I personally do not like bass detached from the rest of
the music, ie, too powerfull, booming.


Since you tried to do a DBT, I think you ought to follow "Ten (10)
Requirements For Sensitive and Reliable Listening Tests" as posted at
http://www.pcabx.com/ . Pay special attention to item 5, and this applies to
both power cords.



Quite a primitive website there, yuck, hurt my eyes. But in anycase, no
one modified or did anything to those power cords in any way.

"JBorg" wrote in message
m
Arny Krueger wrote

If I try a pair of interconnects and didn't like it, it goes back.

Same for me only usually, I'm smart enough to leave the bad ones in
the store.

Since you didn't had a chance to audition it, did you leave it
behind 'cause you can't afford it ?

No Borgma, unlike you I can often identify garbage when I see it.

Fella" wrote
JBorg wrote:


Double blind again? You seem to believe they're effective, do you really?
How so?

We did a double-blind test on audioquest 3.3 ac power cord attached to the
densen amp as against a stock power cord, just yesterday evening. I was the test
subject. A friend helped.

While I was away from the hifi room the friend changed, or not, the cord
employed (all during the amp volume was not touched, the amp is always on a
ready to use state, the only on-off switch with it is in the back) and wrote
what he did to his paper, as in, 1: AQ käytössä (finnish for "AQ in use") He
then leaved the room and went to the adjacent room, closed the door. We had
agreed that he makes always sounds of plugging and unplugging from wall outlet
regardles of changing or not. Also, he takes exactly one minute to do so, then
leaves the room. I never saw his face all during the test (lest I sense what he
did ) I came over from the living room to the hifi room and pressed play (the
number 7 on the remote to be exact). I could not see the outlet or the cord in
between because we covered it all up with the gigantic pillows from the living
room couch (yes yes, I have an understanding wife ) ...

Now what the AQ power cord does to the densen is that it makes it a rock-n-roll
jukebox bass thumping and pumping machine, as opposed to it being this fluid,
sweet midrange romantic type of amp otherwise. So for all practical purposes my
friend could have left the light on in the room, or off, and I was to determine
that.

We did the experiment 15 times, I new all without a mistake.

Hi Fella, so you did 15 times without a mistake! I'm not familiar with
the DBT protocols for power cords, are length and gauge the same?


It was enough that I listened to the first ten seconds or so of song number 7 of
buena vista social club with ry cooder disk. The bass there is normally soft,
very much in the background with a good system, but with the AQ attached to the
densen it is almost boomy and compressed (the AQ also gives extra shine to the
tweeters, all in all, almost a cheap loudness effect to an amp that doesn't even
have tone controls!).

So yes, double blind or not, if the differences are there they will be there at
any given time. The key is that the test should not intimidate.

More on this later, as I will be contacting, hopefully, Mr Randi for one other
type of component also.

Alright, I been reading about your dbt thread before.