Well I guess it just goes to show there are sub-divisions within all camps. Many objectivists would argue all day and night that they do. An interesting discussion on the topic: http://www.audioholics.com/audio-amplifier/the-sound-of-an-amplifier
Ethan Winer may be on the verge of proving expensive interconnects don't matter.
- Thread starter RCHeliGuy
- Start date
Help Support MartinLogan Audio Owners Forum:
Well I guess it just goes to show there are sub-divisions within all camps. Many objectivists would argue all day and night that they do. An interesting discussion on the topic: http://www.audioholics.com/audio-amplifier/the-sound-of-an-amplifier
amey01
Well-known member
So what about green pen on CDs?
So many people fooled into doing something which ultimately made you look profoundly stupid.
But they listened, right? And they all heard a difference, right?
There was even a pseudo-scientific explanation - that the green pen absorbed the red laser and reduced reflections (or some rubbish). Sheep painted their CDs in droves!
It was only 10 or so years ago that people all over the audiophile world were raving about the GSIC.
These same people were disparaging and demeaning to anyone who laughed at them, saying that these people "had to listen"; and "don't judge it until you've heard it treat your discs"; "it's quantum physics"; "we don't yet understand with current science"......blah blah. All the usual rubbish.
http://audioasylum.com/reviews/Accessory/Golden-Sound/GSIC-30/general/360880.html
http://www.6moons.com/industryfeatures/chip/chip.html
So where did that end up? Why aren't people still using GSICs??
Someone was churning these little 5c bits of plastic out and making a killing! I wish I could have thought of it.
In fact, a successor to the GSIC is still being made:
http://www.machinadynamica.com/machina62.htm
Anyone care to try and report back? [It permanently treats 14 :gasp: CDs now, not 10 like the old model, so it's even better value!!]
So many people fooled into doing something which ultimately made you look profoundly stupid.
But they listened, right? And they all heard a difference, right?
There was even a pseudo-scientific explanation - that the green pen absorbed the red laser and reduced reflections (or some rubbish). Sheep painted their CDs in droves!
It was only 10 or so years ago that people all over the audiophile world were raving about the GSIC.
These same people were disparaging and demeaning to anyone who laughed at them, saying that these people "had to listen"; and "don't judge it until you've heard it treat your discs"; "it's quantum physics"; "we don't yet understand with current science"......blah blah. All the usual rubbish.
http://audioasylum.com/reviews/Accessory/Golden-Sound/GSIC-30/general/360880.html
http://www.6moons.com/industryfeatures/chip/chip.html
So where did that end up? Why aren't people still using GSICs??
Someone was churning these little 5c bits of plastic out and making a killing! I wish I could have thought of it.
In fact, a successor to the GSIC is still being made:
http://www.machinadynamica.com/machina62.htm
Anyone care to try and report back? [It permanently treats 14 :gasp: CDs now, not 10 like the old model, so it's even better value!!]
Last edited:
Not sure if you are specifically addressing this to me or not, but I'll answer. I never believed in the green pen thing; seemed silly to me. And I've never even heard of GSIC. I've already admitted that there is plenty of snake oil out there. I just don't buy into your absolutist viewpoint that the very existence of snake oil means you can't trust anyone trying to sell something and that everyone who hears a difference in something is fooling themselves if they can't explain it with objective measurements. I think the world is a little more complicated than absolutists try to pretend and we don't currently have all of the answers to life's little mysteries.
Edit: Basically, you seem to be implying that because some people are fooled by some things, that anyone stating they hear a difference in something is fooling themselves unless there is a proven scientific reason for the difference. That is fallacious logic.
Edit: Basically, you seem to be implying that because some people are fooled by some things, that anyone stating they hear a difference in something is fooling themselves unless there is a proven scientific reason for the difference. That is fallacious logic.
Last edited:
This thred is losing its depth as its now a typical camp to camp debate and has covered several areas of this topic.. Try it ! If its not to your liking then don't use it! Don't doubt before you have hard proof in YOUR system.. Best thing is many dealers will let you demo esoteric cables before you buy ! Why not try .. It cant hurt but only to enforce your beliefs or reinforce yours! You have nothing to loose !
amey01
Well-known member
No, it wasn't Rich.
But you didn't try it in your system?
Very true. We still don't have any idea why recordings never sound remotely like live music.
No, never saw any reason to. My CD's play just fine. Nor do I have some nostalgia-based belief that digital is inferior to Vinyl. There's plenty of audiophile bandwagons that I don't buy into.
Seriously? Live music consists of multiple point sources radiating omnidirectionally, each interacting with the acoustic environment in its own unique way. Recordings are miced and mixed by engineers to produce a stereo signal containing all the musical information, which in turn is reproduced by two speakers with their own unique way of interacting with their acoustic environment. I mean, I'm simplifying it quite a bit but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand why recorded music doesn't and never will sound remotely like live music. But then, I've never A/B/X tested a live band against my system to know for sure that I could tell the difference. So who knows if the difference I think I hear is real or if I'm just fooling myself.
amey01
Well-known member
My thoughts exactly when talking about USB cables. So we're more alike than you thought.
It's not that at all. Sure, it may be part of it, but not entirely. Because amplified music still sounds live - even though it is miked to a stereo mix.
I'll never forget a little anecdote I experienced about 20 years ago - I was walking through a busy shopping centre and noticed the PA system was sounding particularly amazing. I really noticed that music, and I was doing a double-take that the PA system sounded so wonderful. It wasn't until about 15 minutes later, when I entered another wing of the shopping centre, I realised that a small ensemble was being piped into the PA. That is what I mean by live v recorded.
That is - a mixing desk feeding a live signal to a sound system will sound completely different to that same mixing desk feeding a signal to the same sound system via a recoding medium. No idea why?
Bernard
Well-known member
I wonder if such a comparison has been made using open reel tape as the recording medium. Someone somewhere must have done it.
I don't know, Adam. According to Mark's (and other's) logic, that anecdote is just another case of your brain fooling you. Much like Bernard's anecdote about his wife. In the absence of blind ABX testing, you have to assume that there are no perceivable differences between the two because there is no obvious scientific explanation for it. You just have to accept the fact that your ears and brain were fooling you, despite what you think you heard.
I'm sure you disagree, which I have no problem with. This gets to the heart of the issue I have with absolute objectivists. The world is always a little more complicated than they like to admit.
By the way, I don't even have a USB cord in my system and haven't formed an opinion either way about whether a more expensive one would outperform a $7.00 generic cable. I literally have no experience with it on which to base such an opinion.
I'm sure you disagree, which I have no problem with. This gets to the heart of the issue I have with absolute objectivists. The world is always a little more complicated than they like to admit.
By the way, I don't even have a USB cord in my system and haven't formed an opinion either way about whether a more expensive one would outperform a $7.00 generic cable. I literally have no experience with it on which to base such an opinion.
User211
Well-known member
I've just spent some time measuring the FR of two different interconnects between my DAC and preamp.
Using the same IC and running multiple FR tests I found some sample variation in the plots.
Using a different IC I found the same.
However, cross comparing the plots I found more variance than I ever saw running multiple tests on the same cable.
I have the plots.
I really fail to understand what the issue is here. You CAN measure differences quite easily, as I suspected. We're not talking massive in the case of these two cables, but it is there. Since it is Friday I will refrain from posting any evidence, but I will post it.
The evidence will be refuted anyway, so it is all pointless. The point is I know it is measurable with a very good degree of certainty.
Using the same IC and running multiple FR tests I found some sample variation in the plots.
Using a different IC I found the same.
However, cross comparing the plots I found more variance than I ever saw running multiple tests on the same cable.
I have the plots.
I really fail to understand what the issue is here. You CAN measure differences quite easily, as I suspected. We're not talking massive in the case of these two cables, but it is there. Since it is Friday I will refrain from posting any evidence, but I will post it.
The evidence will be refuted anyway, so it is all pointless. The point is I know it is measurable with a very good degree of certainty.
User211
Well-known member
I did it for e.g. post #86 Dave.
I agree most here believe cables make a difference. But there are always some who don't.
Prices? Entirely up to the individual.
I agree most here believe cables make a difference. But there are always some who don't.
Prices? Entirely up to the individual.
Last edited:
User211
Well-known member
amey01
Well-known member
I won't refute it, but I'll question it.
When an analogue signal propagates across a room, there are many things that can impact it. The most obvious being the position of your person in the room. Did you control this? What about small differences in position of the receiving mic?
Just a question.
Big foot, global warming, the lochness monster and now this???? Did you measure that in pounds or usd? What side of the road were you driving on??
User211
Well-known member
I was in pretty much the same position. The point is I measured both cables over and over again, to spot the variance caused by such things. I could never see a variance as great as swapping cables.
If anyone is in doubt just buy a test mic and do it yourself. Or do it if you already have one.
User211
Well-known member
Two cables were ACE - a cheap I/C from ebay, and TEAC. TEAC 1m in length. The ACE cable is 3 metres in length.
Note smoothing is a 1/24 to show variance. Most post plots at 1/3 which is a lot smoother. The majority of variance is above 1K, but there is some around 200Hz.
I have been messing with the Apogee xover parts and running simulations in XSim. This isn't the frequency response I'm actually after, so a bit more work is required. Note the xover parts obviously stayed static during the tests.
I'm reasonably convinced this is real. I am sure others won't be.
ACE versus ACE.
TEAC versus TEAC.
ACE versus TEAC.
Note smoothing is a 1/24 to show variance. Most post plots at 1/3 which is a lot smoother. The majority of variance is above 1K, but there is some around 200Hz.
I have been messing with the Apogee xover parts and running simulations in XSim. This isn't the frequency response I'm actually after, so a bit more work is required. Note the xover parts obviously stayed static during the tests.
I'm reasonably convinced this is real. I am sure others won't be.
ACE versus ACE.
TEAC versus TEAC.
ACE versus TEAC.
Last edited:
User211
Well-known member
ACE versus TEAC HF zoom
TEAC versus TEAC HF zoom
TEAC versus TEAC HF zoom
Last edited:
User211
Well-known member
If you save the images to your computer and open them up and zoom in there's just about enough resolution in the images to see what's going on in more detail.
The question is, do you believe it?:ROFL:
The question is, do you believe it?:ROFL:
Similar threads
