|
Post by johneppstein on Oct 20, 2016 17:56:44 GMT -6
Ask Rincewind. He knows for sure. So does Twoflower...
|
|
|
Post by rowmat on Oct 20, 2016 18:17:42 GMT -6
Over the years (mainly when I was working in the industry) I attempted to have several proponents of expensive esoteric cables agree to conduct blind testing with a group of interested hi-hi buffs. It always turned out the same. Some would just say blind testing doesn't work and refuse to conduct a listening session while some others would initially agree but then change their mind citing that blind testing is flawed, or arguing how the test should be carried out, or the listeners would not be used to the equipment, or the room acoustics, or the listeners had not spent enough time to learn the subtleties and characteristics of various cables and interconnects etc. etc. It seems all were happy to have a listening session with the esoteric cables already installed but not if it involved a shootout. So in the end NONE would put their mouths where their, or other people's money went! Of note is these were either people/organisations who were selling cables or those had already spent a LOT of money purchasing cables. I am of the opinion that blind testing often does not work for two reasons: One is procedural - Many ignorant practitioners of the blind testing religion attempt to use it to prove a negative, i.e. "Well, none of the people in the test heard it so it doesn't exist!" Wrong. All they've proved is that nobody in their sample could hear a difference under the particular conditions imposed by the test. (Which speaks to the second reason, we'll get to that...) You can't prove a negative, you can only prove a positive. And if even ONE PERSON can perceive the phenomonon in question it doesn't matter how many can't - it's proved, and those people simple don't have the acuity to pick up on it. The second reason is that, IMO, the way that most blind tests are set up- biases the tests by forcing a certain perceptual mindset on the subjects that is unnatural. People process audio in different ways depending on context, and blind testing forces an analytical mindset that fosters uncertainty and is antithetical to the mindset employed by experienced audio professionals engaged in artistic critical listening. I'm not saying it isn't a useful tool for many things. I'm saying that it isn't the untimate be-all and end-all that the fanatics purport it to be. A corrollary of this is that I don't believe that electronic testing is the be-all and end-all, either. No test gear is perfect. If it was they wouldn't need (or be able) to keep improving it. Of course the issue with any type of listening comparison tests (blind or not) is by the time the cables are switched you are relying on your memory as to what you believe the differences are/were. Therefore unless the differences are rather obvious I agree this is not reliable. However I refer to reviews often published in Audiophile magazines that typically state changing from a standard power cable to a $2000 cable is 'revelatory' experience. Of course the differences may be 'chalk and cheese' to a golden eared audiophile magazine gear reviewer (insert magazine advertising revenue sources here) and simply beyond the scope of the mere mortal 'bronze' eared listener to audibly comprehend. I have often advocated somekind of method of instantly switiching between cables but this has always been rejected by the high-end cable crowd because it was claimed that the switching equipment that was employed would compromise the sound and invalidate the test.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Oct 20, 2016 20:17:59 GMT -6
Rowmat, I think it's just way too easy to poke at straw men here. When you said, "However I refer to reviews often published in Audiophile magazines that typically state changing from a standard power cable to a $2000 cable is 'revelatory' experience. Of course the differences may be 'chalk and cheese' to a golden eared audiophile magazine gear reviewer (insert magazine advertising revenue sources here) and simply beyond the scope of the mere mortal 'bronze' eared listener to audibly comprehend.
First, audio reviewers are such easy targets, because they're in magazines that sell advertising to some of the companies reviewed. Unless you're a billionaire and want to put out a magazine that loses money, there's very few options to workaround that for any magazine. That said, it absolutely does not equal conflict of interest, although that may happen in some instances. Most times they're not beholding to anyone. In time they'd lose all their readership if people kept noticing corrupted reviews. I've had a subscription to Stereophile for more than 30 years. I barely skim through the mag these days, but one good friend of mine is a senior editor there, so I like to see what he's up to. During that time, I've had the pleasure of meeting many of the "big names" in that world, and by and large they're first of all, great music lovers, incredibly informed about thousands of wonderful details of classic music. Second, they know more than 99% of the population about the gear they're reviewing, it's history, and the technology, so they are usually, in fact, experts. Third, many of them have spent a lifetime learning and refining their perceptions, so even if not born with Golden Ears, they've developed them to be near that status. Finally, although there are of course many situations where reviewers might benefit from their proximity to cool gear, all the guys I know of get a very healthy industry discount, but pay for everything they have in their own systems. It's small world, and word would get around too fast. My friend is, if there's truth to the title, a true Golden Ear. He's been on panels worldwide, been through every test and challenge imaginable for decades. He's tremendously respected and well liked, and he's reliably picked out cable differences in more blind tests than any human should endure time and time again. Which speaks to joheppstein's post saying if "one person" can reliable prove something, then it's true. All I'm asking is for people to back off the snark a little regarding professional people who in a way, are first cousins to our breed of music loving, music making, music selling, DIY lovin' gear heads.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Oct 20, 2016 21:37:36 GMT -6
All I'm asking is for people to back off the snark a little regarding professional people who in a way, are first cousins to our breed of music loving, music making, music selling, DIY lovin' gear heads. A nice thought...... I'll check in in a couple of days to see what happened....
|
|
|
Post by stratboy on Oct 21, 2016 4:40:42 GMT -6
Unlike the atmosphere of some other debates and forums, the tone at RGO, even for this known to be sensitive subject, has been remarkably, refreshingly civil. So it can be done, thank goodness.
|
|
|
Post by schmalzy on Oct 21, 2016 10:21:40 GMT -6
Unlike the atmosphere of some other debates and forums, the tone at RGO, even for this known to be sensitive subject, has been remarkably, refreshingly civil. But let me tell YOU what I think of YOU... Just jokes... ***Warning: Long-ass post. I'm long-winded and these intellectual/psychological questions about things we sense REALLY interest me. I spend a lot of time with my brain awake when it should be sleeping so I get spend a lot of time philosophizing with myself about these sorts of things.*** For stuff like this - really squint-mode stuff (I forget who I co-opted that phrase from but it's 100% perfect) - I typically have a number of thoughts: 1) Smarter, more experienced people who I respect and have grade-A gear hear something. Perhaps there's something there. 2) Smarter, more experienced people who I respect and have grade-A gear hear nothing. Perhaps there's nothing there. 3) I'm ok and can still respect people from both groups even though I might find my observations don't match theirs. 4) Small differences in the opinions of those two groups make no difference to me when I'm not fully happy with what I'm capable of doing at this second. I don't need centimeters of improvement, I need miles of improvement. 5) If I'm truly interested in the result, it's way faster and more productive for me to just try the thing than it is for me to speculate. "Should we add this part to the song?" I don't know. Let's try it. "Does angling this acoustic panel change the sound of the room?" I don't know. Let's devise a good way to test it and find out. Maybe that good way is to put an omni mic up and maybe it's just standing in the back of the room while someone else moves the panel. Maybe it's both? My ears change minute to minute so I don't consider them to be especially reliable testing equipment. 6) What I might think is the best testing method might not be someone else's best testing method. Sometimes a measurement is good. Sometimes my ears are good. Sometimes a null test is good. I find myself very intrigued by people who DON'T want to test/try something. Whatever method of testing you come up with, there's a definite benefit to doing the test. You either confirm you're able to hear a difference at that time (and make a judgement call on that difference's effect vs. cost) or you confirm you can't hear a difference at that time. Either way don't have to spend even another half-second thinking about it any more. I don't need to be right or wrong - I just need to satisfy my curiosity and be done with it. If it's something that's distracting me from making music, high-fiving the wife, or playing with my high-energy cat then it's something I need to handle and get out of the way. Regarding these power cables specifically: I don't need to test it. I can't afford it. But I WOULD be super interested in comparing the results of Svart's scientific tests with the results of some listening tests and any other tests we can come up with. Does anyone have any crazy-accurate omni SDCs? A third test could, perhaps, be setting that omni SDC up in an as acoustically neutral environment as possible and recording the difference between the two classes of power cables on speakers. If a high-end measurement-quality SDC can't observe a difference (found out by null-testing and frequency analyzing the Control vs. the high end cable), I know I don't care enough. That test isolates the difference (the power cables) as the only variation but also tests the downstream effect of the cable rather than the cable itself. If a great speaker doesn't see any difference between the two cables (even if the cables offer an observable difference in the electricity coming from them) does it matter? If I'm looking for the very best audio listening situation, sure, it might matter. If having optimal gear plays a part of my enjoyment, sure, it matters. I'd much rather nod my head on the snare hits as I'm enjoying music - that definitely compromises the listening environment more than having a high-end power cable does. I'm not looking for those best-case-scenario situations anyway. I'm trying to make someone's kick drum simultaneously be "round," "punchy," "fat," "tight," "huge," "bloomy," and "purple-er" because that's the mix feedback I just got. Did the artists even consider how the song sounds as a whole!? Do some tests - whatever tests you feel are the most legitimate - and report back! No one needs to be "right." The collective pool of observations (provided that what's reported is truthful observations from your as-best-as-you-can testing method) from the sample size of well-respected and accomplished people we have in this thread is worth way more than any one single person's observations. Maybe we should establish a few testing procedures: A couple different ways to execute the listening test, a couple different ways to execute any practical (measurement-related) tests, and a couple different ways to execute any other testing method that's defined. That way, what we're all observing is as relevant to the other observations as possible. What we'll probably find out in the end is that different speakers react to power variations differently and we've been looking at the finger pointing at the moon rather than just looking at the moon the whole time!
|
|
|
Post by stratboy on Oct 21, 2016 14:48:52 GMT -6
Got anxious to know why and that's what motivated me to choose electrical engineering as my second degree. Opened up a whole new world for me. Problem is that formal electrical engineering schools have had nothing whatsoever to do with anything audio for a good half century. (God has it really been THAT long?) and the people now teaching EE know nothing (about audio). Some programs even teach things that are absolutely wrong when applied to certain types of audio equipment. It was 30 years ago, not fifty, when I graduated from Cal Poly, but they most definitely taught audio. One of my classmates went to work for Soundcraft, then Trident. Another went to Fender and worked on the 4x10 Bassman RI. I went to work for Alpha Audio as product manager for their Boss audio for video editing systems. As far as I know, looking in from the alumnus POV, frequencies from 20 - 20K Hz are still taught at my alma mater.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2016 3:59:52 GMT -6
Nobody is going to do these expensive tests. For a very simple reason. They are absolutely unnecessary. Serious engineers with degrees know the outcome. Those who believe something else are a very small minority which does not want it's belief demystified. Because they a) invested money and/or time to buy or build this stuff and do not want to hear that this was totally pointless. or b) sell this stuff. There is an accepted term for those who preach that they "know" the truth and don't have to bother conducting experiments to prove it. That term is not "scientists". That term is "pedants". (No disrespect intended.) BTW, the world is flat. Ask anybody (who lives on Diskworld!) It also is propelled through space on the backs of four huge elephants standing on the shell of a gigantic turtle named A'tuin. Like I said, ask anybody..... (And if you don't read Terry Pratchett, you need to.) There are no unknown phenomena in this area of physics. So yes. Engineers don't have to believe, they know. There are other areas, where experimental physics makes sense. Power cable - no. The flat world "belief" and the earth centric "belief" are good examples where absurd theories and so-called experimental "evidences" were made for religious reasons. Antique greek science was far ahead of this. Btw - at their time, religion played not a big role... The guys who preach are those who promote religious ideas. Those, who have no evidence for their claims. I just recommend reading physics books. Simpler ones or advanced. Engineering books. Math books. And get a realistic view on what happens.
|
|
|
Post by jin167 on Oct 22, 2016 4:58:19 GMT -6
There is an accepted term for those who preach that they "know" the truth and don't have to bother conducting experiments to prove it. That term is not "scientists". That term is "pedants". (No disrespect intended.) BTW, the world is flat. Ask anybody (who lives on Diskworld!) It also is propelled through space on the backs of four huge elephants standing on the shell of a gigantic turtle named A'tuin. Like I said, ask anybody..... (And if you don't read Terry Pratchett, you need to.) There are no unknown phenomena in this area of physics. So yes. Engineers don't have to believe, they know. There are other areas, where experimental physics makes sense. Power cable - no. The flat world "belief" and the earth centric "belief" are good examples where absurd theories and so-called experimental "evidences" were made for religious reasons. Antique greek science was far ahead of this. Btw - at their time, religion played not a big role... The guys who preach are those who promote religious ideas. Those, who have no evidence for their claims. I just recommend reading physics books. Simpler ones or advanced. Engineering books. Math books. And get a realistic view on what happens. Kreyszig?
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Oct 22, 2016 13:20:52 GMT -6
There are no unknown phenomena in this area of physics. REALLY? There are unknowns being investigated in physics all the time - how do you KNOW that there might not be something being overlooked here? Because your test equipment doesn't show anything? Test gear is being improved all the time. It's not perfect. Or maybe people haven't been looking for the right thing? Or have been assuming that some minor detail is unimportant. I guess you don't read Terry Pratchett. Sometimes the flat world argument is made for satitical reasons. I'd think the giant space turtle would be a clue.... AFAIK the critertia for rating power cables are rather crude and based largely on whether or not a given size of wire is safe (meaning it won't cause your house to burn down) for a given level of current. Maybe there's more to it than that? Of course if you ASSUME that you already know everything you're never going to find something you've overlooked. A REAL scientist keeps an open mind and doen't discount observations out of hand. That being said, I'm inclined to believe that any observed differences in this case are probably due to most cables being too small or made from inferior materials.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Oct 22, 2016 13:34:01 GMT -6
I heard differences between well made high end cables too, not just between the $3 giveaway and a megabuck cord.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Oct 22, 2016 14:11:20 GMT -6
It's not about the power cord taken alone. It's about how it affects specific power supplies and an overall grounding system taken as a whole.
It SHOULD not make a difference if everything is designed properly however in the real world a lot of stuff isn't and different power cord designs, especially simply adding shielding, can make what to me was a surprising difference.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Oct 22, 2016 14:11:28 GMT -6
Glad I wasn't holding my breath......
|
|
|
Post by rowmat on Oct 22, 2016 16:03:27 GMT -6
The premise often used when comparing power cables is that the ordinary cable is assumed to be substandard from the 'go get' and therefore compromises the sound. That can indeed be the case and no one is suggesting that all standard cables are perfect for all situations. Most standard power cables, especially when not used under high demand conditions, ie high powered amps etc. will fulfill the electrical requirements of the equipment being fed and will not compromise the sound. It's simple physics. If there are other issues relating to poor mains supply regulation, substandard internal wiring, bad grounding, bad connections or excessive RFI etc. that is something else that needs to be fixed and should be addressed at the source. One would also expect for proper grounding, balancing and shielding practices to have been implemented rather than running off to spend big $$ on power cables. Spending $2000 on a power cable may make some feel warm and fuzzy but it won't magically fix all those kind of issues. Beyond satisfying the laws of physics we then get into the cable 'X Files'. This is when a power cable seems to possess some special powers that sprinkles 'fairy dust' on the electrons flowing between the wall outlet socket and the connected equipment. These specially enhanced electrons somehow manage to find their way through the IEC inlet socket > fuse > power switch > transformer primary > transformer secondary > rectifier > filter capacitors > local regulation/filtration etc. and finally into the music and well... you can read the various descriptions provided. Apart from the debates between the 'believers' and 'non believers' concerning what they are hearing/not hearing and why, in the main I think it is the excessive prices being charged for these things that is often the trigger for many of these debates. And this is the reason why snake oil salesman have corrupted much of the hi-fi the business... money! There is no practical reason why anyone needs to spend $200, let alone $2000 on a power cable. In fact I would suggest that if the best practical electrically compentant power cables never cost much more than $50 (as there's no reason why they should in most situations) then these cable discussions would be few and far between. (Exceptions apply to high power public address systems which are much more demanding) Pensado even indicated he could use 200 of these power cables! Seriously? Or was he just "gilding the cable lily" in this infomercial? The cable is the conduit that allows energy to flow into the equipment's own power supply. The music doesn't know (or care) that a 3' length of copper/silver/unobtanium etc, was connected between the wall outlet socket and the gear's inlet socket. The gear in question requires a continuous uninterrupted supply of electrons and as long as that requirement is fulfilled then make music and be happy. Of course when starting an installation from scratch it doesn't hurt to over spec the internal wiring to cover any unforeseen demands.
|
|
|
Post by ariel on Oct 22, 2016 18:38:43 GMT -6
The best way to do this test in a set up is like this. Have 3 of these cables, 1 for the converter, the preamp and GTR amp. Record a clean DI signal. Reamp with standard cables through all the gear, then swap out all the cables with the expensive ones. Dual track the gtrs left and right, then do it for bass. Fly in some simple drum groove. Keep the playing simple and locked into one section of the neck for a chunk of it. Do a lead on top as well. If 3 cables is too much then just do it for the gtr amp then with the DI and reamp. This was you wont have to swap cables and rely on memory.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Oct 22, 2016 19:29:00 GMT -6
Bob said,"and different power cord designs, especially simply adding shielding, can make what to me was a surprising difference".
Well, there it is, "a surprising difference". Thing is, i'm not surprised anymore, I've been "surprised" too many times by the improvements or differences I've heard when trying different cables and power cords. I don't think Pensado's response wasn't genuine, I've seen that incredulous look on people's faces before after comparing cables. Don't forget, he's being filmed, which can make you a little self conscious, and he probably is getting a good deal on some power cords because of it, but guys in that position don't use things that suck because they get a break, they have way too many similar opportunities to use something that doesn't suck.
I'm kinda done here, good luck to any of the fellows who give it a try. I can't put it any better than Bob or Jim Williams, and whatever the reason, they've changed out cables and power cords to get better sound, just like me.
You guys can test all you want, it's actually kind of fun if you have a little time, but I've done enough testing and listening. For decades, I've paid close attention to this to have come to my own conclusions, and I don't really need to defend them or prove it to everyone else. There are far too may variables, so I always recommend not jumping to conclusions, and just trying it for yourself. I join in these conversations so others who are curious aren't put off by those who say it's all bullshit. I simple say try it and see what you think, yet I still get pushback for that, which gets tiresome.
I gotta get back to real music work, and my computer's croaking, losing firewire and shutting itself down, ugh..
Hopefully, it's just a shitty cable ;-)
|
|
|
Post by BenjaminAshlin on Oct 23, 2016 1:31:31 GMT -6
Interesting discussion going on here. I find it interesting what bob has said on the issue and i would tend to agree with that line of thinking. In terms of a simple power amp setup why would an expensive power lead be better than this solution? - Place your power amp next to the wall. Make a hole and pull the TPS out of the wall and directly wire it to the transformer. Now obviously nobody is going to do this as a permanent setup. But I ask this genuinely as it wouldn't be beyond the realms of possibility if you were designing a listening room to hardwire the supply into your amplifiers. At the end of the day decent shielded power leads, combined with ensuring your building wiring is up to standard would be as far as i feel i need to go. Just to address the thread title - I feel this wasn't a wise thing for Dave to be advertising to his audience. (althought maybe an mbox does sound better with a $200 power cable )
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Oct 23, 2016 8:37:51 GMT -6
Hi Sideshow, welcome to the forum.
Advertising means you're trying to sell something. Unless Dave was the guy making the cables, or had a vested interest in the company, I don't see a conflict of interest there.
I think he did a service to all the musicians and audio engineers who watch him. He apologized because he too was more than skeptical, he didn't think changing a power cord could make a difference, and knew others would feel the same way.
I don't apologize anymore. Just try it yourself, not once for 5 minutes, but carefully, a couple of times, then get back to me.
|
|
|
Post by BenjaminAshlin on Oct 23, 2016 12:26:40 GMT -6
Hi Sideshow, welcome to the forum. Advertising means you're trying to sell something. Unless Dave was the guy making the cables, or had a vested interest in the company, I don't see a conflict of interest there. I think he did a service to all the musicians and audio engineers who watch him. He apologized because he too was more than skeptical, he didn't think changing a power cord could make a difference, and knew others would feel the same way. I don't apologize anymore. Just try it yourself, not once for 5 minutes, but carefully, a couple of times, then get back to me. Promote was the word I was meaning. And the guy doesn't do that many gear reviews with manufacturers so I thought this was a strange choice.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Oct 23, 2016 13:00:18 GMT -6
"so I thought this was a strange choice"
I agree, it wasn't typical, but I'd guess he's already covered a lot of territory since he's done so many Pensado's Place shows by now, he probably needed something new and different to look at.
|
|
|
Post by ben on Oct 24, 2016 14:17:01 GMT -6
I did a shootout years ago with audio cables and there was a definite difference in sound. Power cables? I don't know but I'd love to hear a shootout.
|
|
|
Post by mcirish on Oct 24, 2016 14:39:39 GMT -6
I'm glad there are guys who feel they can hear the difference in a power cable. That's fine for them. I've known guys who felt that using copper water pipes as speaker cables is making a huge difference for them too. (seriously) It falls on deaf ears when tell them that the leads inside the speaker are 20 gauge. They still think there is a difference. That's fine too. We don't need to agree. In some ways, we are working with fractions of a percent of increased quality. More obvious to hear would be changing out ADC/DAC in a studio. But, even then, (when working with higher end converters) to the uneducated, the difference is still less than a couple percent perceived quality increase. You can take all those esoteric cable changes and stack them up against moving the microphone one inch during a session and it will be night and day difference. I think people get bored with just making music well recorded and we're always looking for that little extra. I'd be happy if I could just make sure the mic was in the right place to begin with. Does that make me a simpleton? It doesn't matter. We make art so it can be consumed by listeners. Unfortunately, the majority are going to take that piece of art and truncate it to a 128k MP3 file and listen on earbuds. It's the law of diminishing returns.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Oct 24, 2016 15:32:51 GMT -6
micros said, Does that make me a simpleton?
No, it's always good to be reminded where our focus should be. Once you've tried a few of these things, it doesn't take much time or effort or lots of money to simply get a little better cabling for a system that after all, we spend loads of time with, and quite a bit of money on.
|
|
|
Post by rowmat on Oct 24, 2016 16:24:02 GMT -6
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2016 22:30:56 GMT -6
It's not about the power cord taken alone. It's about how it affects specific power supplies and an overall grounding system taken as a whole. It SHOULD not make a difference if everything is designed properly however in the real world a lot of stuff isn't and different power cord designs, especially simply adding shielding, can make what to me was a surprising difference. I get your point. I never said proper grounding, power supply topologies, clever routing and installation, length of cables, different potentials etc. would NOT make huge differences in this field. They DO. I absolutely agree with what you say about power supply as a whole system. YES. These things can make a huge difference. About shielding power supply cable - the electromagnetic field around the power cable is much stronger than the one of signal cables. Shielding them might lower the influence on other cables in suboptimal studio installations and therefore - might - make a difference. Hmm. Unorthodox. Didn't calculated if this makes much difference. If it does enough to improve audio in the end. Why not? Even then - the core does not make the difference. And from scientific point of view NO esoteric explanation needed, d'accord with known physics, laws of electrodynamic fields... Huge electromagnetic fields make problems. Industry machines with fat electro motors. Poorly designed or defect washing machines, dryers, there are lots of potential sources of problems. But most of the problems come thru the power line and not by induction into the cable from wall plug to IEC thru the walls. Ferrit filters on power cables from digital equipment with switcher psus to avoid bringing HF dirt into the mains system etc. - yes. Makes sense. No (acceptable) LCD display without this already stock. Good connection, good plugs etc. - i agree with ALL of this. Poor PSUs have poor filtering and therefore dirty frequency stuff above 60Hz. Yes. But - a mains power cable alone makes no difference if it is generally suitable for the load, because a pure cable is - no - serious lowpass filter. Power line filters do make sense for sure. Yes. I do not believe that we are really talking different things. There are lots of ways to improve the power supply system. And of course we are NOT talking ideal or even flawless PSUs inside all studio equipment or an ideal grounding. Therefore these things really matter. Noone is blind about real world mains and psu problems. Especially if we think about decades old equipment, that is in use, with insufficiant capacitors in psus due to age. I get that you improve studios with rebuilding the mains supply system. Makes totally sense. I get that you use seemingly better kind of mains cables and overall get improved performance of the system. You might not think about connector qualities anymore. You will re-think mains cable length and routing if you invest into expensive mains cable. And this makes huge difference. Twisted pair mains power cables? Naaa. Esoteric cable alloys? Naaa. We are not talking theory. Physics and engineering is not abstract model science depending on ideal conditions and becoming invalid because of tolerances, real world problems etc.. There are several methods of evidence. The statistical method is only ONE of them. And most probably the weakest, most failure prone, hardest to make systematically correct, most expensive. Deduction from the known is not only more "elegant" but also brings the explanation of the phenomenon with it most of the time. Not deduction from belief but from the known. There are few elementary powers in the universe. No way seemingly hearing improvement in audio range with the power cables we are talking about is an evidence for an unknown "new" elementary power that is "overlooked". There is many other explanations already that are well inside the known physics, cybernetics, hearing biology, psycho-acoustics and psychology. There is no reason to belief someting that can be known. And of course no serious evidence of such a mysterious new physical principle or elementary power has been given in the last 100 years of electricity. Because you can not proof what does not exist.
|
|