1. Home
  2. cables
  3. 141974-118455

Is it all in my head??

So I bought a Kimber Power Kord...  yeah, yeah, but it looks prettier than stock, is well built, and having built all my cables myself I appreciated the craftsmanship.

...so, I'm playing an Everest LP--symphony stuff.. and it always sounded noisy and muffled (which is why i decided to give it a spin).  The power cable is plugged into my furman conditioner, and all the other cables are the same.  I swear this LP sounds more "untangled" now (that's the best way i can describe it).

I am an engineer and know intellectually this makes zero sense--is it some confirmation bias?  How can it be.. i didnt buy it expecting a sonic impact, i bought it because i couldn't make one that looks as cool (think of it as a necklace for my rig).  But I swear I think i hear a difference...  tell me it's all in my head.
waltertexas
elizabeth
6,726 posts
 
The notion that audiophiles never go back to see how the old wires sound is silly to say the least. I swap cords around often enough I know each one's sonic signature. I even have two Furutech Duplex for the amplifier. One GTX-D (Gold) and the other GTX-D NCF (Rhodium) just to change the tone slightly as I see how the system is responding.    And I have three power cords for the amp! all sitting right there to use. Though the new Pangea AC14XL seems to be the permanent cord of choice!      
To me the worst problem is the naysayers often seem to think the folks who can hear the differences are deluded idiots.And make  assumptions based on THAT premise.
prof
1,741 posts
 
elizabeth wrote:

—- lTo me the worst problem is the naysayers often seem to think the folks who can hear the differences are deluded idiots.And make assumptions based on THAT premise.”


Thats only because you refuse to read what some of us *actually* say and you continue to carry around the false equivalence of “being in error” and “bias” with “being an idiot.”   It is precisely BECAUSE the brightest person in the room is susceptible to bias-error effects that it makes sense to consider that variable.

So long as you absolutely refuse to even try to understand this point, you will have yourself to blame for your irritation with your own straw man.
elizabeth
6,726 posts
 
irritation? Why do you assume I an making an emotionally charged statement? You pride yourself on being rational, yet deny the person you are complaining about the same? Then the fact I wrote 'often' not 'all' in the line " naysayers often seem to think the folks who can hear the differences are deluded idiots." If I go find the insults.. (most of which are deleted here on the gon') the straw man theory goes out the window. You CAN find the insults in endless posts anywhere on the internet.
prof
1,741 posts
 
Elizabeth 

Fair point!

However I’m used to seeing just that criticism lobbed at me and others here who are not calling you and others deluded idiots. I believe I’ve seen you impute this to my posts before as well.

So taking “the naysayers” to include me and some others who are skeptical didn’t seem like a stretch.


Of course if you point only to those who have said such things you aren’t referring to a straw man.   Problem is the accuracy of that claim can’t be taken for granted given how often I, and other skeptics here, have routinely been misrepresented and strawnanned.   I say something like “how did you determine it was a real effect vs imagined” and as is often seen here I get back something like “so you take me to be a deluded idiot??!!”
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
14,147 posts
 
Something good is coming out of this. It looks like we have a new definition of a naysayer. Someone who will argue until the cows come home. 🐄 🐄 🐄 Or, someone who will argue until he’s blue in the face. 🥶
More to discover