2. cables
  3. 146425-122613

The Science of Cables

It seems to me that there is too little scientific, objective evidence for why cables sound the way they do. When I see discussions on cables, physical attributes are discussed; things like shielding, gauge, material, geometry, etc. and rarely are things like resistance, impedance, inductance, capacitance, etc. Why is this? Why aren’t cables discussed in terms of physical measurements very often?

Seems to me like that would increase the customer base. I know several “objectivist” that won’t accept any of your claims unless you have measurements and blind tests. If there were measurements that correlated to what you hear, I think more people would be interested in cables. 

I know cables are often system dependent but there are still many generalizations that can be made.
128x128mkgus
douglas_schroeder
1,824 posts
 
BTW, I did NOT invite NASA to my testing.  ;) 
douglas_schroeder
1,824 posts
 
Now to go listen to this new preamp under review; it's INCREDIBLE! It blows the doors off all the others! The sound is AMAZING. It is 50% BETTER than anything out there... 

But not as good as Schroeder Method.  LOL  ;)


prof
1,741 posts
 
Douglas,


Congrats.  Never heard of anyone passing a blind test for AC cables.  Only failures.

But, the ABX was testing one leg of cabling, not the entire set.




I'm not quite grokking that.  Could you be a bit more detailed about how you blind/ABX-tested the AC cables?  I would love to see results between a regular, competently built AC cable and whatever high end cable you would have chosen.

I blind tested some Shunyata cables against a $15 off-the-shelf cable and could not detect differences in blind tests.   I wouldn't think this would, or should, change anyone's mind about cables any more than your results would.

However, if after looking over your methodology, it looks sound, I would take your results as a data point in favor of some cables being audibly different.   But, just as no  one should take my blind tests as definitive, I wouldn't take yours - either of us could have made some unknown error.  Which is why repeatability of the same results by other parties is a feature in science.

Still, for us measly audiophiles, we do our best and make our own conclusions from our experience.


And the results of your blind tests would also support the usefulness of blind testing.  Lots of blind-test nay-sayers claim blind tests aren't, or can't be, conducted in a way to detect differences.  So they think blind testing itself somehow erases the ability to hear real differences.  Which is untrue as lots of blind test show positive results for identification.  Some of mine were positive too.


glupson
1,794 posts
 
"It blows the doors off all the others!"
That must be a Schroeder four-door amplifier. Regular ones are just two-door.


(joking, ok?)
douglas_schroeder
1,824 posts
 

Prof, testing for power cord was with system identical throughout, using two identical stereo amps, and different power cords on amps. Only variable is power cord on amp.


blupson, I like that! Good joke! What was the phrase years ago, "Four door, on the floor..."

More to discover