Power cords

[Jim Alfredson]

Good sound is subjective as well. And that's my overall point.

Exactly.

The science behind these cords is bunk.

The science up to Galileo Galilei said the sun was turning around the earth and, just to be more modern, told us that feeding vegetarian animals like cows with meat derived food was safe and we have 'mad cow disease'.

As for life being too short for such questions, the original question in the first post of this thread asks if these cords made a difference. The answer scientifically is no.

Scientifically there is no difference between a Stradivari and a Yamaha. Scientifically there is no difference between a good steak and a McDonald hamburger.

You're really stretching.

This cable obsession reminds me of religion. Despite mounds of evidence to the contrary, there are still people in this world that believe the earth is only 6,000 years old. What can you do?

[Jim Alfredson]

As long as you guys don't start putting little rocks on your CD players and marking the edges of the CDs with magic pens...

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

Against Method: Outline of an Anarchistic Theory of Knowledge (1975) by Paul Fayerabend

Oho! One to order next time I'm in the library.

This is a fucking WONDERFUL place, isn't it?

MG

[jazz1]

As long as you guys don't start putting little rocks on your CD players and marking the edges of the CDs with magic pens...

Thinking of putting a little rock crystal on my cd player, just for luck!!

Please check this out, this is fantastic........

[porcy62]

Good sound is subjective as well. And that's my overall point.

Exactly.

The science behind these cords is bunk.

The science up to Galileo Galilei said the sun was turning around the earth and, just to be more modern, told us that feeding vegetarian animals like cows with meat derived food was safe and we have 'mad cow disease'.

As for life being too short for such questions, the original question in the first post of this thread asks if these cords made a difference. The answer scientifically is no.

Scientifically there is no difference between a Stradivari and a Yamaha. Scientifically there is no difference between a good steak and a McDonald hamburger.

You're really stretching.

This cable obsession reminds me of religion. Despite mounds of evidence to the contrary, there are still people in this world that believe the earth is only 6,000 years old. What can you do?

Quite the contrary, I see your points, but I see a dogmatic position too. There isn't a "science", but "sciences", not a big coherent system who explain everything with maths and experiments. Often scientific theories clashed in their fundaments, but they still lives along togheter for long times since a new better one (usually simpler and more elegant, rather then more "truthful") replaced them.

Personally I tend to trust "sciences", and scientists, because they assured to me and to humanity a comfortable and longer life, at the same time I am aware that "science" is just a "word" (and a huge lobby of interests): "science" is what people consider "science" in a specific period of time, everything else is "religion", "superstition" "pseudoscience". In the western world scientists looked, and most of them still look, at traditional non western medicines with disregard. The enlighten scientists who investigated without prejudice discovered lots of interesting and helpful things.

I found it funny and paradoxical that we strongly support buddhist monks in their fight for freedom without understanding their "un-scientific" (from our point of view) system of life. Because if we assume that "our science" is always correct, probably chinese invasion is a good thing. At the end they broght " scientific progress". And what about Native Americans? Back then science, religion and economic interests were strictly allied in the name of "progress" and "liberty".

What does all these philosophical issues has to do with a fancy power chord?

Probably nothing, but the history of audio industry is full of unortodoxical engineers (and scientists) that achieve great results only because they went against the mainstream scientific theories. And it's full of scammers too.

Edited May 4, 2008 by porcy62

[Kevin Bresnahan]

I work in test laboratory. We measure microwave devices, many of which are used in your cell phones. A lot of these tests are done at or below the noise floor of the test device. We have to use the best equipment, tweaked and amplified with the best electronics or our measurements are incorrect. I have had to swap out AC power cords many times, whether it be switching benches or changing set-ups. Never in my 22 years of doing this has a power cord change made any difference in the noise floor and the resulting test data was the same.

To put it bluntly, I think these AC cord manufacturers are ripping people off.

Any amp or CD player or turntable that actually can be influenced by a minute change in resistance (maybe) or capacitance (maybe) or inductance (maybe - but at audio frequencies??) is VERY poorly designed. And let's be completely honest here - IF (and that's a big IF) an AC cord maker intentionally adds resistance or capacitance or inductance, why would you want that particular tuning network for every piece of gear in your system? Why would it improve the sound of every piece of gear?

It also should be noted that many high-end equipment manufacturers charge exorbitant amounts of money for their products, selling them as "the best there is". If these AC cords did anything to improve the sound, these same high-end companies would be all over this. It would allow them to make even bigger claims of audio superiority. But they don't. Why is that? It's because they know there is nothing to it. The emperor has no clothes.

[jazz1]

I work in test laboratory. We measure microwave devices, many of which are used in your cell phones. A lot of these tests are done at or below the noise floor of the test device. We have to use the best equipment, tweaked and amplified with the best electronics or our measurements are incorrect. I have had to swap out AC power cords many times, whether it be switching benches or changing set-ups. Never in my 22 years of doing this has a power cord change made any difference in the noise floor and the resulting test data was the same.

To put it bluntly, I think these AC cord manufacturers are ripping people off.

Any amp or CD player or turntable that actually can be influenced by a minute change in resistance (maybe) or capacitance (maybe) or inductance (maybe - but at audio frequencies??) is VERY poorly designed. And let's be completely honest here - IF (and that's a big IF) an AC cord maker intentionally adds resistance or capacitance or inductance, why would you want that particular tuning network for every piece of gear in your system? Why would it improve the sound of every piece of gear?

It also should be noted that many high-end equipment manufacturers charge exorbitant amounts of money for their products, selling them as "the best there is". If these AC cords did anything to improve the sound, these same high-end companies would be all over this. It would allow them to make even bigger claims of audio superiority. But they don't. Why is that? It's because they know there is nothing to it. The emperor has no clothes.

Found this interesting remark......

Because a phenomenon cannot either be explained or proven with the science that objectivists hold up as absolute does not mean that it does not exist. If a tree falls in the forest, and no one is present, does it make a sound? If God cannot be broken down into a mathematical equation, does that mean there is no God? Has no one heard anything about Quantum Physics, which questions the existence of an absolute objective reality? And are we really so sure of ourselves that we can proclaim with absolute certainty that only what we can “prove” is real, when we still don’t fully understand the evolution of the universe and human life as we know it, let alone how the human body functions?

As countless listeners and reviewers have noted, equipment that measures wonderfully does not always sound good. Conversely, equipment that does not measure well often captivates listeners accustomed to the sound of live acoustic performance. Two pieces of gear with equal measurements can sound markedly different. Does this mean that the people who hear those differences don’t know what they’re hearing or talking about? Does it mean that scientific measurements are at best an inadequate description of reality? Or does it suggest that there are mysteries to sound, perception, and levels of reality that human beings have yet to fully uncover, explore and understand? And if in the end there are mysteries we have only begun to comprehend and explain, are we capable of entertaining them as real, or must we continually dismiss them in favor of the black and white absolutes that seem to have paralyzed public and political debate at the start of the 21st century?

[Daniel A]

Because a phenomenon cannot either be explained or proven with the science that objectivists hold up as absolute does not mean that it does not exist.

As long as nobody has come up with a real double-blind ABX test of power chords, I can't see how anyone can claim that there is a phenomenon with any certainty, explicable or not.

[Larry Kart]

To change the tune just a bit, what about the possible effects on your system of having your household power upgraded from 120 amps to 200 amps? I had that done recently -- to make possible a potential kitchen remodeling among other things (a good many of today's appliances need more than 120 amps) -- and I thought I could hear quite a difference. Of course, that was as close to a without-controls, wishful-thinking "test" as could be, but what about the science of the effects or non-effects of such an upgrade? Sense or nonsense?

[Kevin Bresnahan]

To change the tune just a bit, what about the possible effects on your system of having your household power upgraded from 120 amps to 200 amps? I had that done recently -- to make possible a potential kitchen remodeling among other things (a good many of today's appliances need more than 120 amps) -- and I thought I could hear quite a difference. Of course, that was as close to a without-controls, wishful-thinking "test" as could be, but what about the science of the effects or non-effects of such an upgrade? Sense or nonsense?

Well, considering that there have been many psycho-acoustic studies that demonstrated that human acoustic memory is only about 10 seconds, you would be a supreme human specimen to hold an acoustic memory for as long as 120 to 200 amp conversion would take.

[Kevin Bresnahan]

jazz1, what cable manufacturer do you work for?

[captainwrong]

As for life being too short for such questions, the original question in the first post of this thread asks if these cords made a difference. The answer scientifically is no. The answer to someone who just spent $300 on them is probably "yes".

We believe what we want to believe.

This is pretty much the deal in my what I've seen. I'm a live and let live guy. If someone thinks they can hear a difference between an expensive power cord and the one that came with the component, more power to 'em. However, I don't, none of the few pro-audio guys I know seem to care about this stuff and I can't find any scientific reason why there would be a difference. And that's good enough for me.

[Christiern]

If you ponder the original question logically, you should conclude that it is a very, very silly question that raises a non-problem. This is post #37, how many more will it take to convince some posters of the obvious?

We have fashion victims, but I had no idea that we also have cable victims--well, if one can sell bottled NY tap water and pet rocks, I guess gullibility knows no bounds.

[jazz1]

To change the tune just a bit, what about the possible effects on your system of having your household power upgraded from 120 amps to 200 amps? I had that done recently -- to make possible a potential kitchen remodeling among other things (a good many of today's appliances need more than 120 amps) -- and I thought I could hear quite a difference. Of course, that was as close to a without-controls, wishful-thinking "test" as could be, but what about the science of the effects or non-effects of such an upgrade? Sense or nonsense?

Well, considering that there have been many psycho-acoustic studies that demonstrated that human acoustic memory is only about 10 seconds, you would be a supreme human specimen to hold an acoustic memory for as long as 120 to 200 amp conversion would take.

Maybe the difference is in a new clean power supply not in the amp rating??

[jazz1]

jazz1, what cable manufacturer do you work for?

I wish I did then I would not need to spend the money. ;=)

[Larry Kart]

To change the tune just a bit, what about the possible effects on your system of having your household power upgraded from 120 amps to 200 amps? I had that done recently -- to make possible a potential kitchen remodeling among other things (a good many of today's appliances need more than 120 amps) -- and I thought I could hear quite a difference. Of course, that was as close to a without-controls, wishful-thinking "test" as could be, but what about the science of the effects or non-effects of such an upgrade? Sense or nonsense?

Well, considering that there have been many psycho-acoustic studies that demonstrated that human acoustic memory is only about 10 seconds, you would be a supreme human specimen to hold an acoustic memory for as long as 120 to 200 amp conversion would take.

If you're listening to same very-familiar-to-you recordings on either side of the conversion? No problem with me either way the science goes -- the upgrade was for other reasons. I am, however, now having my own personal power plant constructed in the backyard.

[jazz1]

If you ponder the original question logically, you should conclude that it is a very, very silly question that raises a non-problem. This is post #37, how many more will it take to convince some posters of the obvious?

We have fashion victims, but I had no idea that we also have cable victims--well, if one can sell bottled NY tap water and pet rocks, I guess gullibility knows no bounds.

Bottled water?? I am all for it, where I live one can taste strong chlorine.

For me the best way to taste if the water is good or bad, is to have some with your espresso,

Having a strong coffee shows water difference easily.

My regular coffee shop only serve bottled water with the espresso's, this is after I made the boss

taste the difference. Unfortunately the espresso price went up 10c.

[Christiern]

Bottled straight from the tap, chlorine intact. Why do I have the feeling that my post is being used to change the subject?

[porcy62]

Bottled straight from the tap, chlorine intact. Why do I have the feeling that my post is being used to change the subject?

No needs to change the subject. It's an old issue, measuremnt vs subjectivism. A useless discussion at this point.

As Jim said: People believe what they want to believe.

One side believe in strictly scientific explanation, the other side in what they hear. The first side believe the other side are cheated by its own mind and expectations (psychoacoustic, another scientific explanation).

I tried to shift the issue towards a broad point of view, a philosophical discussion about science (epistemology), without success.

I am out at this point.

Maybe I'll open a new thread about Wittgenstein, Popper and Fayerabend in 'Classical Music', or in Allen's 'Coherence' thread.

As far for water, tap water is excellent in Rome, actually I spared enough money on bottled water that I bought those fancy power chords from jazz1.

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

Has no one heard anything about Quantum Physics, which questions the existence of an absolute objective reality?

Allen Lowe has

http://www.organissimo.org/forum/index.php...st&p=782342

MG

[Daniel A]

One side believe in strictly scientific explanation, the other side in what they hear.

FWIW, a true blind test could be useful for both; if there isn't any difference of statistical significance, there wouldn't be anything that needed to be explained.

[porcy62]

One side believe in strictly scientific explanation, the other side in what they hear.

FWIW, a true blind test could be useful for both; if there isn't any difference of statistical significance, there wouldn't be anything that needed to be explained.

jazz1 reported his personal blind test, and the scientists cutted his throat.

Edited May 4, 2008 by porcy62

[Jim Alfredson]

One side believe in strictly scientific explanation, the other side in what they hear.

FWIW, a true blind test could be useful for both; if there isn't any difference of statistical significance, there wouldn't be anything that needed to be explained.

Correct, though jazz1 reported his personal blind test, and the scientifists cutted his throat.

That was hardly a true blind test. Too many variables.

Again, it would be really easy to do this the right way, since as Kevin explained, our audio memory is extremely short.

If you're tesing the power cord on a CD player, the test would be set up like this:

-- Get two identical CD players.

-- Hook them up to your preamp/amp with the same cable at the same length. Hopefully your preamp/amp has separate inputs that are switchable (CD, Aux1, Aux2, etc.) Use two of the same or check the specs to make sure each of the inputs has the same specs (impedence, frequency response, etc. They should be, but you never know. Just don't use the turntable preamp input! )

-- Start with the stock power cords.

-- Take two identical CDs and load them in the players.

-- Press play on both at the same time.

-- Listen and switch back and forth between the two, make sure they sound the same (they should if the manufacturer is worth anything).

-- Put the expensive power cable on one and restart the identical CDs. Switch between the two. Is there a difference?

Better yet, try the test on one person at a time, not telling the person that you're switching between an expensive cord and a regular cord. Just ask the if they hear any difference.

[Daniel A]

Well, that would perhaps be to overstate things a bit. However, while the results are interesting, I think the test would have to be conducted "double-blind" and with more participants to be reliable. As Jim suggested, two identical setups would probably be the way to go.

EDIT: my comment was meant for porcy, but Jim's post came in between. It could also prove interesting to include tests where two identical cables were used for both setup 1 and 2.

Edited May 4, 2008 by Daniel A

[Jim Alfredson]

Found this interesting remark......

Because a phenomenon cannot either be explained or proven with the science that objectivists hold up as absolute does not mean that it does not exist. If a tree falls in the forest, and no one is present, does it make a sound? If God cannot be broken down into a mathematical equation, does that mean there is no God? Has no one heard anything about Quantum Physics, which questions the existence of an absolute objective reality? And are we really so sure of ourselves that we can proclaim with absolute certainty that only what we can "prove" is real, when we still don't fully understand the evolution of the universe and human life as we know it, let alone how the human body functions?

As countless listeners and reviewers have noted, equipment that measures wonderfully does not always sound good. Conversely, equipment that does not measure well often captivates listeners accustomed to the sound of live acoustic performance. Two pieces of gear with equal measurements can sound markedly different. Does this mean that the people who hear those differences don't know what they're hearing or talking about? Does it mean that scientific measurements are at best an inadequate description of reality? Or does it suggest that there are mysteries to sound, perception, and levels of reality that human beings have yet to fully uncover, explore and understand? And if in the end there are mysteries we have only begun to comprehend and explain, are we capable of entertaining them as real, or must we continually dismiss them in favor of the black and white absolutes that seem to have paralyzed public and political debate at the start of the 21st century?

And thus, why we'll always have churches and fancy cord manufacturers that take people's money.