2. misc-audio
  3. 1383246560

Objective vs. Placebo relating to system changes

I am continually baffled by the number of people that are convinced that changes to power cords, speaker wires, interconnects, etc. in their systems result is objectively real changes. While I won't go so far as saying that making these changes absolutely doesn't make a difference, I would love to have the resources to challenge people prove it to me and test it with my own ears.

Here's what I would do if time and financial resources were no object (I'm visualizing retired millionaires that are audiophiles).

I would build a listening room where the only components in the listening space were the speakers and the speaker cables coming through opening in the wall where the rest of the system was setup. The idea would be to allow the test subject the opportunity to create their system of choice and then have the opportunity to become very familiar with the system by spending hours listening. Then I would let them know when I was going to start changing different components on them on a very random basis and they should report any changes that they heard so we could link the changes to any potential changes on the other side of the wall.

Here's a short list of things that I'd try:

(1) I would replace the upgraded power cord with the stock unit.
(2) I would install or remove isolation (e.g. Nordost sort kones) devices from a component.
(3) I would replace interconnects with basic quailty products.
(4) I would replace well "broken-in" cables with otherwise identical new ones.

Depending on the results of doing these test slowly over a period of time I would consider swapping out some of the more major components to see how obvious a macro change was if the listener wasn't aware that a change had been made.

I can tell the difference between new and broken in speakers (on ones that I'm familiar with) so I know this break-in is very real and would also not be at all surprised with differences from amplifiers and analog sources being obvious. I'm not as sure about digital sources.

So the question is, what components in your system would you be confident enough to bet, say $1,000, that you could identify that something changes if it was swapped out?

In my system I am sure that I could identify a change in amplification or speakers, but highly doubt that I could do the same with any cables, isolation devices, or digital sources. Maybe I just reduced myself to being a non-audiophile with low-fi gear?
mceljo
elizabeth
6,726 posts
 
Brownsfan.. On the other hand... car-syrup like Vornado intakevair twirlers.. and gas magnets still are sold.
The old conspiracy that cars can run on water, just the petro companies block it from the public... But buy our device...
Wanna buy some muffler bearings?
david12
1,398 posts
 
The problem to me with tweaks, is that just changing a system can make it sound better. I believe we are attuned to changing sensory input, any change may sound better. For example, before I saw the error of my ways and bought an ARC Ref 75, I used 2 very good integrated amps. Whenever I switched from one to the other, it sounded better, whichever one I changed to.

Accepting this and the desire, hope that there will be an improvement,so you hear one, then this is where I hear a difference. I would say in all the major components, amps, CD players, speakers etc. All the elements of a wiring loom, including PCs, I am sure I can hear a real difference. Knowing if it is better or just different, can be more difficult. I am sure, cones, supports make a real difference, distinguishing them, more difficult. Cone A and B both help, which is better, I really find difficulty with.

As others have said, With some caveats and qualifications, if it sounds better, it is better and don't lose sleep over it.
brownsfan
1,238 posts
 
Elizabeth, The muffler bearings are on my list but first I need to get my headlight fluid changed before winter. I thought Hondas were supposed to be reliable, but it seems like its one thing after the other.

No doubt there are film-flam artists and others who are untrustworthy for a variety of reasons in audio. It has been my experience that the crowd around here is pretty good on exposing these folks.

Think study think study read think study then think some more! It has been almost 10 years since I bought anything that wasn't a clear improvement, not the sort of thing David is talking about above.

Things are good enough now that apart from tube rolling etc, everything that comes in will be used so that what comes in is on a trial basis. My ICs and PCs in particular, were the last element in getting me there. Interestingly, as I replaced more of the cabling, I found that I could remove a good bit of my room treatment. I must surmise that the RFI/EMi was contributing to the high end nasties that I thought was inherent to Maggies or my listening room.
mceljo OP
983 posts
 
Cars do run on water (actually hydrogen) in Iceland. The issue isn't technology, instead it is infrastructure as they have very special "fuel" stations making it a similar problem to going all electric. I don't know about hydrogen, but in some places the electricity to charge a car can cost more than the gasoline and if the electricity is coal generated it isn't really an improvement overall for the environment. At this point the cost keeps people from getting excited about going away from Dino cars. Eventually, one of these cars will get a Bose stereo and this post will be back on topic.
skoczylas's avatar
skoczylas
218 posts
 
I find it interesting that many of those who come close to being in the position to do such an experiment - namely audio reviewers and editors of audio magazines - say outright that they do not 'believe' in blind testing. Why not? I don't mean to imply that components don't make some difference, but I do think many of those differences are much harder to identify, and that it's even harder to state one is preferable to the other.
More to discover