James Randi vs. Anjou Pear - once and for all

As no audible difference exists between cables (which does not relate to LCR and it's interaction with components and then only in the most extreme of circumstances - passive preamp etc) then randis money is quite safe.

Comments regarding people making sighted preferences in their own systems are irrelevant - in unsighted tests these preferences disappear as they do not exist and are merely a function of the imagination of the observer during sighted tests. Cables are susceptible to this methodology and no amount of excuses by enraged cable fans will change that.

Brizon,
If what you say is true, I would think that you have your system wired with the absolutely cheapest cabling. If you are not using the absolutely cheapest cables why not since they all sound the same? What cables are you using?

Brizon,
What cables are you using?
Rja

If consistency is paramount, then I will guess it's Bryston cabling.

This thread makes no sense. The failure of anyone to accept the Randi challenge shows nothing except the inability to accept the methodology of the test. The fact that both sides think the method determines the result to me at least, means that the method, not whether there are differences among cables is all that is in question. As such, nothing will ever be proven or disproven.

hi brizon:

what evidence do you have that all cables sound the same ? as you know, you can't prove a hypothesis only disprove it. if your hypothesis is that there exists no difference bwteen the sound of cables, you would have to test all combinations of cable. if you tested say, 100 pairs of interconnects and ecah test failed to show that there was a difference between two pair of cable, that would not prove that all cable sounds the same. you hafve made a very unscientific and unsustainable statement.
certainly you are entitlee to your opinion. all i would have to do would be to select two pair of interconnect, a stereo system, several recordings and perform a double blind test and fail to support your hypothesis. i bet i can do that.