How can power cords make a difference?

Marketing hype actually makes people more skeptical of a product, not less. When products start claiming fantastic results, they expect nothing less. If they don't hear an astounding difference, then they are more apt to think its a hoax than to fall for the placebo effect.

Holy crap this issue again!?

Don't you think that if power cords made a difference then huge dollar equipment makers would include them with their product? Don't tell me that "frickin" KRELL would be concerned with cost cutting and save margin by putting a smaller guage cord on their stuff? God knows that they would talk it up in their ads (and god knows that they could count on Stereophile mag to pump it up!). I'm purchasing one high quality cord to see if I can hear a difference, I will report what I hear.

Mhubbard. Reasonable thinking about including high quality cords with Krell. Unfortunately, this thread is an excellent example of everyone NOT agreeing as to the value of such products.

What would Krell do when a good customer avoided buying their product, refusing to be forced to pay the extra $150.00 or $250.00 for the cord? This would apply doubly, if that customer believed it was an ineffective and unnecessary expense.

It's the very reason manufacturers traditionally do not include NOS tubes or isolation devices for their products. Krell and others are better off allowing the customer to make these decision them self, even if you are correct that the product would benefit from the inclusion.

i tink albert is correct. one fact that he fails to mention is that many mfr's actually *do* recommend the purchase of aftermarket power cords. some, however, do not...

fwiw, doug s.

702 makes some valid points in my opinion. I rarely do blind testing, but several days ago I did and was surprised by the results. A friend made two recordings using different cables from the source to the recorder. Then he played the two recordings for me without telling me which was done with which cable. ( A single blind test ).

I found myself trying to guess which was which by paying attention to his non-intentional clues. I also kept changing my mind about how A sounded to me, then about how B sounded to me. Without any reference or the armor of my preconceptions, I felt a bit naked. For the first time I feel like I experienced what the double-blind proponents were talking about.

I finally got my friend to give me the remote and stop giving off any clues. Of course, some "damage" was done by now because he'd given clues already. I continued the test and finally was able to form my opinions of the similarity and difference between A & B. It took longer than a non-blind test normally takes me.

The blind test forced me to rely on different things than I'm used to. I was uncomfortable with the change. I also felt some stress to furnish information without being able to rely on my bias.

My conclusion is that I will use all methods in the future. I will use single and double-blind tests when it's possible to do so, as it takes extra work and people to set up. And, I will do my own sighted listening tests.

I know this is an endless debate and even banned outright to discuss on Audio Asylum, but I really think there's a place for all forms of testing.