I recall in olden days Consumer Reports tested speakers with a method
that compared speakers under test with their reference(AR3a). It was an
elaborate system that they considered scientific, to see how closely other
speakers could mimic the sound of the AR, but I wondered how it was able to
distinguish a speaker with better resolution than the AR3a.
This if prefatory to a conversation with an audiophile friend today. I
mentioned that I was not quite pleased with my system's sound. He asked
"Haven't you listened to those Tara Labs cables the rep loaned you? ( I have
some expensive ones on loan, and some much cheaper ones I own and use) I
replied that I had but hadn't heard enough difference to be sure it was
real. Certainly no significant improvement to my ears.
His reply was that the problem is probably that my speakers are too low on
the food chain to discern the difference, and offered to loan me his when he
goes out of town soon. He says I'll hear the difference then.
This raises an interesting point about all those listening tests we hear
about. Maybe the speakers in the tests have too little resolution to allow
differences to be heard.
Have any of the subjectivist RAHE members (surely some exist) had the
experience of discovering that a some point getting better speakers started
making a difference in being able to hear dfferences in the sound of speaker
cables?

Wylie Williams

Wylie Williams wrote:
I recall in olden days Consumer Reports tested speakers with a method
that compared speakers under test with their reference(AR3a). It was an
elaborate system that they considered scientific, to see how closely other
speakers could mimic the sound of the AR, but I wondered how it was able to
distinguish a speaker with better resolution than the AR3a.
This if prefatory to a conversation with an audiophile friend today. I
mentioned that I was not quite pleased with my system's sound. He asked
"Haven't you listened to those Tara Labs cables the rep loaned you? ( I have
some expensive ones on loan, and some much cheaper ones I own and use) I
replied that I had but hadn't heard enough difference to be sure it was
real. Certainly no significant improvement to my ears.
His reply was that the problem is probably that my speakers are too low on
the food chain to discern the difference, and offered to loan me his when he
goes out of town soon. He says I'll hear the difference then.
This raises an interesting point about all those listening tests we hear
about. Maybe the speakers in the tests have too little resolution to allow
differences to be heard.


Actually it's one of the handful of same old point 'audiophiles' use in
such arguments, but it doesn't get around the need for bias controls.

Also, tests of audibel difference can and have been done using the claimant's
own system, where they'd *already* claimed they heard a difference, sighted.
The famous 'Sunshine Audio test is one such example. And ABX tests
incorporate the idea of switching back and forth between A and B in the
belief that you hear a difference (if you don't believe you hear a
difference 'sighted', then continuing the test can only reveal whether
there was a bias towards perceiving 'sameness') . Then you test whether this
difference is real, by testing whether 'X' is identifiable as A or B.



--
-S.

What you describe is probably the single biggest reason to spend as much as
you can on speakers. Unless your electronics are grossly underpowered or
broken, different speakers will always sound far more different than will
cables, or most any other electronic component. OTOH, it is folly to
suggest that even the highest resolution speakers (whatever they are) will
allow you to hear a difference where none exists.


"Wylie Williams" wrote in message
et...
I recall in olden days Consumer Reports tested speakers with a method
that compared speakers under test with their reference(AR3a). It was an
elaborate system that they considered scientific, to see how closely other
speakers could mimic the sound of the AR, but I wondered how it was able
to
distinguish a speaker with better resolution than the AR3a.
This if prefatory to a conversation with an audiophile friend today. I
mentioned that I was not quite pleased with my system's sound. He asked
"Haven't you listened to those Tara Labs cables the rep loaned you? ( I
have
some expensive ones on loan, and some much cheaper ones I own and use) I
replied that I had but hadn't heard enough difference to be sure it was
real. Certainly no significant improvement to my ears.
His reply was that the problem is probably that my speakers are too low on
the food chain to discern the difference, and offered to loan me his when
he
goes out of town soon. He says I'll hear the difference then.
This raises an interesting point about all those listening tests we hear
about. Maybe the speakers in the tests have too little resolution to
allow
differences to be heard.
Have any of the subjectivist RAHE members (surely some exist) had the
experience of discovering that a some point getting better speakers
started
making a difference in being able to hear dfferences in the sound of
speaker
cables?

Wylie Williams

"Bruce Abrams" wrote in message
...
What you describe is probably the single biggest reason to spend as
much as
you can on speakers. Unless your electronics are grossly
underpowered or
broken, different speakers will always sound far more different than
will
cables, or most any other electronic component. OTOH, it is folly
to
suggest that even the highest resolution speakers (whatever they
are) will
allow you to hear a difference where none exists.

Speaker choice has a greater effect on sound output than any other
choice you might make. However, I have not noticed much correlation
between speaker sound quality and speaker price. So you can't simply
buy your way to better sound. Doubling the price of your speakers is
just about as likely to result in worse rather than better sound. It
is for this reason that professionals are rarely willing to evaluate a
speaker unless they know its identity.

Norm Strong

"Wylie Williams" wrote:

I recall in olden days Consumer Reports tested speakers with a method
that compared speakers under test with their reference(AR3a). It was an
elaborate system that they considered scientific, to see how closely other
speakers could mimic the sound of the AR, but I wondered how it was able to
distinguish a speaker with better resolution than the AR3a.
This if prefatory to a conversation with an audiophile friend today. I
mentioned that I was not quite pleased with my system's sound. He asked
"Haven't you listened to those Tara Labs cables the rep loaned you? ( I have
some expensive ones on loan, and some much cheaper ones I own and use) I
replied that I had but hadn't heard enough difference to be sure it was
real. Certainly no significant improvement to my ears.

Let me refresh my recollection here. Aren't you an audio retailer? Don't you
have 20+ years of experience?

His reply was that the problem is probably that my speakers are too low on
the food chain to discern the difference, and offered to loan me his when he
goes out of town soon. He says I'll hear the difference then.
This raises an interesting point about all those listening tests we hear
about. Maybe the speakers in the tests have too little resolution to allow
differences to be heard.

Sure that's the oft-heard response: YOU or your SYSTEM aren't GOOD ENOUGH.
Tell me why no retailer or manufacturer has been able to produce a replicable
experiment that shows that their wire has ANY effect, let alone a POSITIVE
effect on sound quality?

Have any of the subjectivist RAHE members (surely some exist) had the
experience of discovering that a some point getting better speakers started
making a difference in being able to hear dfferences in the sound of speaker
cables?

you might get a response; but not one that is at a level above anecdote. Trying
to make a testable proposition a popularity contest is a good try but it isn't
'evidence.'

(Nousaine) wrote in message ...

Sure that's the oft-heard response: YOU or your SYSTEM aren't GOOD ENOUGH.
Tell me why no retailer or manufacturer has been able to produce a replicable
experiment that shows that their wire has ANY effect, let alone a POSITIVE
effect on sound quality?


Surely if cables sounded different, then that difference must be a
NEGATIVE one? I can see how bad corroded rusty cables that are falling
apart could introduce a bad sound, and a decently constructed set of
cables produce a neutral sound (no change from decent cable to decent
cable) but I have no eay of conceiveing of a way a cable can make
sound better! Unless I start believeing in magic, ofcourse...

Also, unless the cable is so broken that it makes the sound bad, and
there is a slight, subtle difference in the cable sound, then your
brain will self-correct for it in minutes, and you won't hear the
sound again.

Spending money on cables is money that you didn't spend on your
speakers. Any change in sound from cables (if it indeed exists, which
I doubt to any meaningful extent) is certainly not worth paying money
for.

(Graeme Nattress)

(Nousaine) wrote in message
...

Sure that's the oft-heard response: YOU or your SYSTEM aren't GOOD ENOUGH.
Tell me why no retailer or manufacturer has been able to produce a
replicable
experiment that shows that their wire has ANY effect, let alone a POSITIVE
effect on sound quality?


Surely if cables sounded different, then that difference must be a
NEGATIVE one? I can see how bad corroded rusty cables that are falling
apart could introduce a bad sound, and a decently constructed set of
cables produce a neutral sound (no change from decent cable to decent
cable) but I have no eay of conceiveing of a way a cable can make
sound better! Unless I start believeing in magic, ofcourse...

This is a very good point but one that cable manufacturers have already seized
upomn. "Our cables sound better BECAUSE they lift MORE veils."


Also, unless the cable is so broken that it makes the sound bad, and
there is a slight, subtle difference in the cable sound, then your
brain will self-correct for it in minutes, and you won't hear the
sound again.

This is an incredibly concrete point. Humans sonically acclimatize quickly;
otherwise you couldn't stand to listen to TV or make a phone call.


Spending money on cables is money that you didn't spend on your
speakers.

And this is the straw that broke the wire camel's back. I'd add that its money
you didn't spend on more/better programs too.


Any change in sound from cables (if it indeed exists, which
I doubt to any meaningful extent) is certainly not worth paying money
for.

In my 1 1995 piece "Wired Wisdom" in the canadian Sound & Vision I have a
resource deployment side-bar that compares how I spent a thousand dollars in
three months on live and recorded music INSTEAD of a thousand on speaker cables
that were sonically indistinguishable from $18 worth of zip cord.

"Nousaine" wrote in message
you might get a response; but not one that is at a level above anecdote.
Trying
to make a testable proposition a popularity contest is a good try but it
isn't
'evidence.'

I appreciate your comment and I fully understand that I will not get
"evidence". I am aware of the evidence concept, but I am not soliciting
evidence at tids time, just unreliable unscientfic anecdotal impressions.

Wylie Williams

"Wylie Williams" wrote in message

"Nousaine" wrote in message

you might get a response; but not one that is at a level above
anecdote. Trying to make a testable proposition a popularity contest
is a good try but it isn't 'evidence.'

I appreciate your comment and I fully understand that I will not get
"evidence". I am aware of the evidence concept, but I am not
soliciting evidence at tids time, just unreliable unscientific
anecdotal impressions.

Which begs the question, why solicit unreliable unscientific anecdotal
impressions? One could just make them up for one's self, were a large
number of them to be desired. Furthermore, large numbers of them are
available on the google archives.

"Wylie Williams" wrote in message
et
I recall in olden days Consumer Reports tested speakers with a
method that compared speakers under test with their reference(AR3a).
It was an elaborate system that they considered scientific, to see
how closely other speakers could mimic the sound of the AR, but I
wondered how it was able to distinguish a speaker with better
resolution than the AR3a. This if prefatory to a conversation with an
audiophile friend today. I mentioned that I was not quite pleased
with my system's sound. He asked "Haven't you listened to those Tara
Labs cables the rep loaned you? ( I have some expensive ones on loan,
and some much cheaper ones I own and use) I replied that I had but
hadn't heard enough difference to be sure it was real. Certainly no
significant improvement to my ears. His reply was that the problem is
probably that my speakers are too low on the food chain to discern
the difference, and offered to loan me his when he goes out of town
soon. He says I'll hear the difference then. This raises an
interesting point about all those listening tests we hear about.
Maybe the speakers in the tests have too little resolution to allow
differences to be heard. Have any of the subjectivist RAHE members
(surely some exist) had the experience of discovering that a some
point getting better speakers started making a difference in being
able to hear dfferences in the sound of speaker cables?

Once upon a time I asked a speaker cable audible differences proponent
something like: "What is the cheapest speaker that can be used to hear
differences between cables". He said "NHT 2.5i". So, I ran right out and
bought a set of NHT 2.5i speakers (pretty good speakers by the way).
Needless to say, I still couldn't hear differences between different brands
of speaker cable that had similar DC resistance.

Guess I should have bought the 3.3s, instead!

;-)

"Wylie Williams" wrote in message . net...
I recall in olden days Consumer Reports tested speakers with a method
that compared speakers under test with their reference(AR3a).

Their reference for a while was the AR-LST. Consumer Reports actually
reviewed the AR-3a at one time a few decades back and felt that its
treble and upper midrange output was not adequate to generate flat
power. The gist of that review was one reason that Roy Allison ended
up doing a very involved article on power response in wide- and
narrow-dispersing speakers for the JAES.

It was an
elaborate system that they considered scientific, to see how closely other
speakers could mimic the sound of the AR, but I wondered how it was able to
distinguish a speaker with better resolution than the AR3a.

Again, it was the LST. It achieved a 95% accuracy score on a private
test they did, which is why they selected it.

This if prefatory to a conversation with an audiophile friend today. I
mentioned that I was not quite pleased with my system's sound. He asked
"Haven't you listened to those Tara Labs cables the rep loaned you? ( I have
some expensive ones on loan, and some much cheaper ones I own and use) I
replied that I had but hadn't heard enough difference to be sure it was
real. Certainly no significant improvement to my ears.
His reply was that the problem is probably that my speakers are too low on
the food chain to discern the difference, and offered to loan me his when he
goes out of town soon. He says I'll hear the difference then.

Actually, all that matters is whether they are clean with the speakers
you are using. Unless you plan on purchasing those speakers he is
going to loan to you, the test would be pointless. If there are no
audible differences with your existing speakers and you intend to keep
those speakers, then the wires are, for all intents and purposes,
identical sounding.

This raises an interesting point about all those listening tests we hear
about. Maybe the speakers in the tests have too little resolution to allow
differences to be heard.

With the tests I did, I mainly used Dunlavy Cantatas. I also have used
some NHT M6 satellites, some Waveform MC satellites, some NHT ST4
towers, and my own Allison IC-20 models. Are any or all of those
adequate? There are a number of different design philosophies involved
with those speakers, needless to say.

Have any of the subjectivist RAHE members (surely some exist) had the
experience of discovering that a some point getting better speakers started
making a difference in being able to hear dfferences in the sound of speaker
cables?

With all the speakers I used, the cables all sounded identical. In
order to amplify the differences as much as possible, I sometimes used
excessively cheap and long 16 AWG lamp cord, and compared it to short
sections of 12 AWG wire (similar to thick Monster stuff, with the very
fine thread bundles), as well as to some 12-foot sections of Dunlavy
LCR Ultra cable, which sold for almost a thousand bucks a set.

Howard Ferstler

Ref: ...at some point getting better speakers started
making a difference in being able to hear differences
in speaker cables?

Ah..yes...Mr. Williams, this is really not relevant here.
..or is this a big "tongue in cheek" issue? Good! I admire
how you've tweaked this ole warhorse of an idea.

The responses you gather here are from a contingent that
is somewhat "ego" involved with this "cable difference"
thingy! Subjectivism...amps improving, speakers improving
and perhaps all this work does make for a wider set of
variables in the hobby! Possible..but one must contend with
the mindset that "all is the same"...and this "audio manifesto"
has been set in stone within the mental processes of those
controlled by pre-conceived processes. The ego has gotten
involved and begins to protect itself with a form of "Objectivist"
slew..in a field called Audio! Once the sound reaches the ear/mind
construct and all of its "devious workings"...it all becomes
"Subjective" and nothing else. That Subjectivism has a billion
variables and cannot be rectified by any form of Objectivism. That
struggle has been going on here for decades. It has provided much
entertainment for those of us who observe, it provides much
"fodder" for this interesting NewsGroup. It cannot be resolved,
only discussed. The Objective template will not fit over the
Subjective rational. Period!!

To the "newbie" in this ole Audio structure I recommend as befo

If a cable sounds more right to you...get it. If an Amp has some
quality that sounds right to you..get it. ...ad infinitum. No
one lives with the variables that you have within your ear/mind
construct. Beware of those that would suggest that "your
decision" is somehow faulty. Do be open-minded, but trust your
own whims!

Also, if you prefer a certain brand of Speaker or Amplifier for
no good reason..however, to you it seems better, then by all
means put a spotlight on the Logo when you listen...be happy
with your decision...your audio illusions will be more
realistic. That is what it is all about!! Feed those
illusions..they are deeply inside and are subjective..unique to
you! As mentioned before, the music will bloom and flair just a
bit more. Enjoy the music! Enjoy the illusion our ear/mind
construct creates for us. Always...it is Subjective!

Leonard...

__________________________________________________ ___________________________


On Thu, 14 Aug 2003 01:16:10 +0000, Wylie Williams wrote:

I recall in olden days Consumer Reports tested speakers with a method
that compared speakers under test with their reference(AR3a). It was an
elaborate system that they considered scientific, to see how closely
other speakers could mimic the sound of the AR, but I wondered how it
was able to distinguish a speaker with better resolution than the AR3a.
This if prefatory to a conversation with an audiophile friend today. I
mentioned that I was not quite pleased with my system's sound. He asked
"Haven't you listened to those Tara Labs cables the rep loaned you? ( I
have some expensive ones on loan, and some much cheaper ones I own and
use) I replied that I had but hadn't heard enough difference to be
sure it was real. Certainly no significant improvement to my ears. His
reply was that the problem is probably that my speakers are too low on
the food chain to discern the difference, and offered to loan me his
when he goes out of town soon. He says I'll hear the difference then.
This raises an interesting point about all those listening tests we hear
about. Maybe the speakers in the tests have too little resolution to
allow differences to be heard.
Have any of the subjectivist RAHE members (surely some exist) had the
experience of discovering that a some point getting better speakers
started making a difference in being able to hear dfferences in the
sound of speaker cables?

Wylie Williams

Leonard,

Wise words from your side, thanks for placing things in their appropriate
boxes..

KE

"Leonard" wrote in message
...
Ref: ...at some point getting better speakers started
making a difference in being able to hear differences
in speaker cables?

Ah..yes...Mr. Williams, this is really not relevant here.
..or is this a big "tongue in cheek" issue? Good! I admire
how you've tweaked this ole warhorse of an idea.

The responses you gather here are from a contingent that
is somewhat "ego" involved with this "cable difference"
thingy! Subjectivism...amps improving, speakers improving
and perhaps all this work does make for a wider set of
variables in the hobby! Possible..but one must contend with
the mindset that "all is the same"...and this "audio manifesto"
has been set in stone within the mental processes of those
controlled by pre-conceived processes. The ego has gotten
involved and begins to protect itself with a form of "Objectivist"
slew..in a field called Audio! Once the sound reaches the ear/mind
construct and all of its "devious workings"...it all becomes
"Subjective" and nothing else. That Subjectivism has a billion
variables and cannot be rectified by any form of Objectivism. That
struggle has been going on here for decades. It has provided much
entertainment for those of us who observe, it provides much
"fodder" for this interesting NewsGroup. It cannot be resolved,
only discussed. The Objective template will not fit over the
Subjective rational. Period!!

To the "newbie" in this ole Audio structure I recommend as befo

If a cable sounds more right to you...get it. If an Amp has some
quality that sounds right to you..get it. ...ad infinitum. No
one lives with the variables that you have within your ear/mind
construct. Beware of those that would suggest that "your
decision" is somehow faulty. Do be open-minded, but trust your
own whims!

Also, if you prefer a certain brand of Speaker or Amplifier for
no good reason..however, to you it seems better, then by all
means put a spotlight on the Logo when you listen...be happy
with your decision...your audio illusions will be more
realistic. That is what it is all about!! Feed those
illusions..they are deeply inside and are subjective..unique to
you! As mentioned before, the music will bloom and flair just a
bit more. Enjoy the music! Enjoy the illusion our ear/mind
construct creates for us. Always...it is Subjective!

Leonard...


__________________________________________________ __________________________
_


On Thu, 14 Aug 2003 01:16:10 +0000, Wylie Williams wrote:

I recall in olden days Consumer Reports tested speakers with a method
that compared speakers under test with their reference(AR3a). It was an
elaborate system that they considered scientific, to see how closely
other speakers could mimic the sound of the AR, but I wondered how it
was able to distinguish a speaker with better resolution than the AR3a.
This if prefatory to a conversation with an audiophile friend today. I
mentioned that I was not quite pleased with my system's sound. He asked
"Haven't you listened to those Tara Labs cables the rep loaned you? ( I
have some expensive ones on loan, and some much cheaper ones I own and
use) I replied that I had but hadn't heard enough difference to be
sure it was real. Certainly no significant improvement to my ears. His
reply was that the problem is probably that my speakers are too low on
the food chain to discern the difference, and offered to loan me his
when he goes out of town soon. He says I'll hear the difference then.
This raises an interesting point about all those listening tests we hear
about. Maybe the speakers in the tests have too little resolution to
allow differences to be heard.
Have any of the subjectivist RAHE members (surely some exist) had the
experience of discovering that a some point getting better speakers
started making a difference in being able to hear dfferences in the
sound of speaker cables?

Wylie Williams