HDMI cable - £5 vs £55 (discussion)

aliEnRIK

Perception ~

I post on a few hifi forums too and one ABX test caught my eye

There were 2 cable 'believers' and 2 'none believers' tested in an ABX BLIND TEST

Unfortunately one of the believers had to leave early but his test thus far was 100% accurate
The other believer got all but 1 right (The 1 being were they tried to trick him and he was even quoted as saying thus)

The 2 none belevers couldnt tell any reasonable discernable difference

I think that certainly points towards some people being able to percieve things better than others (Which is natural, like some can run faster or whatever). So its certainly true that what 1 person may percieve, another simply cannot

Marty_J

aliEnRIK wrote: »

Ive found through my extensive testing that when fitting any cables (PARTICULARLY new cables), they take time to 'bed in'
I have no reasonable scientific explanation for this other than I assume the equipment acclimitises to the conditioners/cables and it takes a 'running in' period before theyre at their best (Ive found this wether its a mains cable, conditioner, interconnect or speaker cable)

Wouldn't this be something of a random process, a crap-shoot if you will?

One would expect "bedding in" to make things sound worse more often than it makes it sound better, and hence it would be an undesirable thing to happen to one's equipment.

Silver cables in particular take an AGE to bed in (Around 6 months in my 'general' use). Silver in particular sounds worse to start with (Very tinny and bass light), and gradually changes for the better

But the bass frequencies in music also have the most energy, and so if there is going to be a difference, should sound immediately better when transmitted through a superior conductor such as silver.

Its why I dont believe in ABX tests. Noone can tell a reasonable difference as I believe all equipment acclimitises to the changes of cables over 'time' (Though some changes are instantanious)

But surely you accept that our senses acclimatise to stimuli?

Once one accepts this, there ceases to be any need to postulate why something looks/sounds better over time.

Occam's razor and all that jazz.

aliEnRIK

Marty. Im not arguing with you
If you dont believe me thats fine. Tell me the tests YOUVE done so I can see exactly where your coming from

Ive done extensive tests, both audio and visual including ~ cables used (Braided and shielded), siting of equipment, isolation platforms, earthing equipment etc

If you say otherwise then you can only be calling me a liar, or a complete f**kwit

Ill give you another conditioning example. A month after I bougt my isotek mira my dad wanted one. It was fitted and neither of us saw any discernable difference.

I completely forgot about it until just before christmas when I went round and he was watching 'transformers'. I 'noticed' how everything had a yellow hue! I mentioned this and he sad he hadnt changed anything. We calibrated it and found the colour needed turning quite a few notches down, all because the mira had 'bedded in' (And the picture certainly looked better than when I last checked)

aliEnRIK

Marty_J wrote: »

One would expect "bedding in" to make things sound worse more often than it makes it sound better, and hence it would be an undesirable thing to happen to one's equipment.

Absolutely true. EVERY new cable ive fitted (Bar hdmi ones), have sounded worse than the one that was on (Or in the case of scarts, look very dark), until such time they had 'bedded in'

Marty_J wrote: »

But the bass frequencies in music also have the most energy, and so if there is going to be a difference, should sound immediately better when transmitted through a superior conductor such as silver.

Absolutely, and over 'time' they do.

My arcam amp (Which ive just replaced) had that exact effect. It was HORRIBLE sounding to begin with. And over time began to play absolutely beautifully detailed music and capable of sofa shifting bass when needed.

Leopard

aliEnRIK wrote: »

Marty. Im not arguing with you

aliEnRik,

You're always arguing with Marty J about this. :rotfl:

aliEnRIK wrote: »

Ill give you another conditioning example. A month after I bougt my isotek mira my dad wanted one. It was fitted and neither of us saw any discernable difference.

I completely forgot about it until just before christmas when I went round and he was watching 'transformers'. I 'noticed' how everything had a yellow hue! I mentioned this and he sad he hadnt changed anything. We calibrated it and found the colour needed turning quite a few notches down, all because the mira had 'bedded in' (And the picture certainly looked better than when I last checked)

Now that one's naughty. There's no proof (that you've mentioned) which would lead one to assume that the change was due to the Isotek bedding in as opposed to the television itself simply mellowing with age. Or, at least, that the Isotek was the cause of the change.

By the way, I installed a 5-metre QED Qunex (directional) sub-woofer cable yesterday to replace the ordinary lead I'd been using for some time. The sound from it (a KEF) seemed a bit muddy after the revamp I'd given the rest of the system. The difference this cable made was instant and amazing, even to my ears!

But for your postings, here, I probably would not have thought to do that. So, thanks again! :beer:

thescouselander

aliEnRIK wrote: »

There was, but minor

We're now running into the other hifi 'does it or doesnt it'

Ive found through my extensive testing that when fitting any cables (PARTICULARLY new cables), they take time to 'bed in'
I have no reasonable scientific explanation for this other than I assume the equipment acclimitises to the conditioners/cables and it takes a 'running in' period before theyre at their best (Ive found this wether its a mains cable, conditioner, interconnect or speaker cable)
Silver cables in particular take an AGE to bed in (Around 6 months in my 'general' use). Silver in particular sounds worse to start with (Very tinny and bass light), and gradually changes for the better

I fitted an isotek MIRA to my tv around 6-8 months ago. It took several days for a definite change for the better was discernable. I now plug the mira through my isotek SIGMAS whch has taken several weeks to look its best.

Its why I dont believe in ABX tests. Noone can tell a reasonable difference as I believe all equipment acclimitises to the changes of cables over 'time' (Though some changes are instantanious)

This is quite interesting. I can accept that some electrical components can change with use however it seems a bit of a stretch to think a cable could change significantly.

The only thing I could think of is that maybe the wire's impedance is changing (possibly due to oxidation at the contact area on the wire) so the total load impedance is better matched to the amplifier. If this is the case, you might well ask - is putting in better contucting cable actually working against you.

Marty_J

aliEnRIK wrote: »

Marty. Im not arguing with you
If you dont believe me thats fine. Tell me the tests YOUVE done so I can see exactly where your coming from

Nobody's arguing, we're just discussing.

Where I'm coming from is basically the link I posted above. I know, because of how the human central nervous system works, people get used to things the longer they're exposed to them. Therefore, it's not necessary to come up with other theories to explain such a phenomenon. I just go for the simplest explanation, as it makes the least assumptions with the least amount of guess work.

I also work in the music industry, so I get to use a lot of expensive equipment on a regular basis. People who actually have to make their living from their equipment don't go in for this sort of thing, whereas consumers do.

Ive done extensive tests, both audio and visual including ~ cables used (Braided and shielded), siting of equipment, isolation platforms, earthing equipment etc

If you say otherwise then you can only be calling me a liar, or a complete f**kwit

I'm not saying either, and I really wish you'd stop taking these discussions so personally. I thought we had got over that a long time ago. What you've postulated there is what philosophers call a false dilemma fallacy.

All I'm doing is disagreeing with your findings. In fact, I'm not even doing that; I'm trying to present alternatives which explain your findings.

If you want to hold up a test as evidence for something, you should be prepared for others to suggest possible alternatives. That's how science works. The other way, fundamentalism lies.

Ill give you another conditioning example. A month after I bougt my isotek mira my dad wanted one. It was fitted and neither of us saw any discernable difference.

I completely forgot about it until just before christmas when I went round and he was watching 'transformers'. I 'noticed' how everything had a yellow hue! I mentioned this and he sad he hadnt changed anything. We calibrated it and found the colour needed turning quite a few notches down, all because the mira had 'bedded in' (And the picture certainly looked better than when I last checked)

How do you know the change wouldn't have happened anyway without the conditioner?

Saying that the TV needed adjusting because the conditioner was connected sounds like it could be a questionable cause fallacy.

We must be careful not to confuse causality with coincidence.

aliEnRIK

The tv as 4 or 5 years old and had had EXTENSIVE running in. The only factor was the mira. It had been calibrated only a few weeks previous (Last ditch attempt to see if he was happy with his tv or not).

Theres no other possible explanation except the mira changed the calibration somehow

aliEnRIK

Also ~ apologies again Marty

Just gets my back up when people question the sheer volume of tests ive done ~ which most pretty much conclude the same (Not all mind). If they didnt truly make any discernable difference then id say so

(the tv didnt NEED anything by the way. My tv works fine, but it works BETTER using a conditioner and braided cable)

aliEnRIK

thescouselander wrote: »

This is quite interesting. I can accept that some electrical components can change with use however it seems a bit of a stretch to think a cable could change significantly.

The only thing I could think of is that maybe the wire's impedance is changing (possibly due to oxidation at the contact area on the wire) so the total load impedance is better matched to the amplifier. If this is the case, you might well ask - is putting in better contucting cable actually working against you.

I would certainly like to understand it better

The reason I started geting into cables as I too was a 'none believer'
How could a meter length of cable have ANY effect on the miles and miles of cable from the power station

I used the basic cable that came with my arcam A85 amp for about 3 years. Then tried an isotek elite out of sheer interest (off ebay so already 'run in')
The difference was jaw dropping and instantanious. Drum beats in particular came crashing through on the track I tried. Voices more natural and so forth

From then on ive tried and tested loads of cables