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
taras22
236 posts
 
@rodman99999 

Thank you for posting those links....and for those genuinely interested you may want to follow up on the phonon reference ( its role in electrical conductivity is pretty fascinating stuff....).
celander's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
celander
1,036 posts
 
Prof has expounded at length about blind testing methodology. Search for those posts. If I recall the gist of one thread, my take away from those discussions is that blind testing is nearly impossible to do effectively. And I offer this by way of discussion, rather than going down another rabbit hole.
rodman99999
3,557 posts
 
Q)  Anyone know the quickest way to skin Shrodinger’s Cat?   A)  Fast Furrier Transform
celander's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
celander
1,036 posts
 
A2) A furry quantum knife being linked to a random subatomic event that may or may not occur.
douglas_schroeder
1,824 posts
 

Prof, yes; I voluntarily reviewed AVA's ABX Comparator (review is found at dagogo.com) with the express intent of 1. Seeing what an unusual device it is and how I would appreciate it, and 2. ABXing my ability to discern various products. I was aware that I was putting my "reviewer's credentials" on the line with one form of assessment.

I did the testing with it and passed solidly (i.e. 8 or 9 of ten in most trials) on every genre of gear tested except power amps. (The article discusses the results, and reveals that post-mortem I learned that I had similar results to AVA.

I figure that if I can pass ABX, which was not easy, I can tell if there is a much more obvious difference with Schroeder Method. So, yes, I think I have a good basis to discern a difference with Schroeder Method when I passed challenging ABX with power cords, ICs and SCs.


Suspicion is like inverse infatuation.   :)

More to discover