You hit the nail on the head with Paul's expected response here!

CraftAero damn the first part of your write up was hilarious I definitely agree with you Paul is a very good salesman

Who is talking about $1000 interconnects? How much did Ethan's test equipment cost? Should he had bought some cheap Chinese knock-offs since all test equipment is the same?

LOL, you said exactly what was on my mind. Sadly, audio is fraught with snake oil. We all enjoy audio so much we take it seriously....

@@jimolson9671 Paul could sell a lump of coal labelled "Pre-Diamond". 99.9% of us ain't buyin' it but some poor sucker's wife is sporting coal on her finger and trying to convince her friends and family that it's superior to their shitty "current diamonds".

What a great story, thanks for posting.

Love it ❤

But you came across this cello Ethan, it made me laugh very, very much :-)

😂

You are absolutely right

Well... thunderf00t debated with wesbro Baptist Church so... Anything's possible :-)

Some "audiophile" forums have even BANNED the discussion of double-blind tests. If you even mention the idea you are banned from the forum.

This test will solve nothing except how Paul and Ethan hear things. The real point is if YOU hear a difference. If it sounds better to you (not Paul or Ethan) than buy it, if you don’t hear a difference, why would you buy it?

What test?? The actual TEST was done in this video: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/kN-Hp5acprSlY4U.html This is just a debate about measurable, observable things. As someone pointed out, there is NOTHING to debate, here. Ethan already proved that WITH the null test. This I guess would just be entertainment. But I'm guessing that Paul fellow will decline.

Yeah, you mean like this one, for instance?! : kzfaq.info/get/bejne/fbqnqtmKna_XYaM.html

Then Ethan should have no problem taking it, right? I mean, I've seen a guy in a demo room, an engineer, once claiming there could be no audible - not to mention measurable - differences in cables, who then was struck by said difference, get up, yelled it was imposssible, and leave the room. Where does that get everybody?

Is this guy (Paul) the equivalent of homeopathie charlatans, but for sound ?

I have 2500$ speaker cable.. its connected to about 30 grand of audio.. I sometimes swap it for 10$ cable to see the differences.. they are minor. I wouldnt be able to blind test. But i could easily blind test xlr cables. Not speaker cables. The differences are so small it's not worth the money. I just keep them for the hell of it Lol

@@mysas5983 Not all the time, but sometimes, definitely.

Ironic right? Like the octopus said, there's a sucker born every minute.

I have expensive cables that I found in a dumpster. They work great but don't sound one bit different from any other adequate cheapo cables I've used? What am I doing wrong? Did the dumpster somehow drain all the mojo out of the cables? ;)

All good points, and No, Paul never accepted. He said he would initially, then reneged.

Wow, this totally nails it. Well said. And so true. I think one problem is people have a hard time admitting they were scammed, even just to themselves. So they dig in and defend their unfortunate purchases rather than face the truth. My Null Tester demo video linked above *proves beyond all doubt* that the wires I tested all pass audio the same. The video clearly shows what the device does and how it works, yet some people choose to remain willfully ignorant.

Ethan Winer it has to be rooted in “ Alpha audiophile” ego. They paid 30 grand for a couple of speaker cables and damn it... they WILL hear a difference, and it’s ALWAYS better to them, never just different. They cannot be contradicted by proof as it would give them permanent psychological damage or harm sales of those that advertise with them. They will never accept the magnitude of their delusions. They always caveat the results "Yeah but..." (One alpha insisted that double-blind testing generates more false/erroneous/biased results than standard auditions.) They cannot handle any mitigation to their Alpha golden ear/audio expert status. I've seen a knock-down drag-out fight at a hi-fi dealer in Virginia. Two 50-something guys flying out the door into the street. The argument? Measured vs magic speaker cables. The defenses are always the same. 1) They have a better ear. 2) They spent more 3) They know more 4) Tests don't matter (unless it favors their opinion) 5) You cant afford it, so you are just angry about that. These same alphas cannot pass a blind abx/DBT but they will be the first to tell you how your system sounds and quality therof without hearing it.

the audiophiles are audiofools...in many cases, more money than sense....of course, that is until AFTER they buy their Brilliant Pebbles...then is all seems to equal out!!! :)

Exceptionally well stated comment !

Thanks, I wish more people would do this type of testing. It would save them a lot of money!

this is flawed... of course a nulltest doesnt show the difference because the difference is small .. a 1khz doesnt become a 1,1khz sinewave... tho i heared it myself and cables do matter, you can keep thinking the nulltest "shows it all" and keep fooling yourself

Yes, but that has nothing to do with measuring fidelity. Imaging is a function of echoes and reverb, either embedded in the recorded source or from reflections in your room. There's nothing a power amp or wire etc can do to affect imaging.

@@EthanWiner Would I not be correct in saying that varying amounts of crosstalk between one cable and the next could affect imaging and separation?

@@EthanWiner Hello Ethan, very informative your videos. Thanks. Regarding "Imaging" I have seen the term "Soundstage" .... Is "Imaging" and "Soundstage" the same thing? I guess "Soundstage" is more related to the position of instruments? In many Beatles albums you can clearly hear guitars on one speaker and vocals on the other speaker... I guess thats "Soundstage" while I think "Imaging" is what you already mentioned a function of echoes and reverb? Im a bit confused but Im sure you are right about "Imaging". Thanks will continue wathching your videos it is so refreshing to find sense and honesty in all this audio world. Thanks a lot!

I turn off my audio gear (and my computer) when I'm not using them. If I'll be back in an hour or less I'll leave it on.

@LD Blake I turn on my computer and audio gear around 10:00 am when I start my day. Not all my audio gear, just the stuff I need to play music and sound from KZfaq videos etc. If I'll be doing music work that day I turn on my big rig once when I start, then off when I'm all done. At the end of the day I turn it all off, around 5:00 or so. When we watch TV In the evening over dinner and then after dinner, I power up everything - a receiver, active speakers, active sub, and either a TV set (while eating) or big screen projector (after dinner with the lights down). Then I turn it all off when we go to bed. I think most people are like this, as opposed to turn on the computer, work for ten minutes, turn it off, then back on again half an hour later. Yes, that's not good. If I have to go out for a few hours but plan to come back to work, I turn off the LCD computer monitor but leave the PC running. My comment was mostly to address the belief that electronics should be left on 24/7. A lot of people believe that! I disagree, and I've been doing it my way for about 55 years with no problems or early failure.

I think you meant to say should *not* sound differently?

Oh no! Did you watch the Null Tester video? A good solid state amplifier will have distortion less than 0.01 percent, which equates to -80 dB. But even really good tube amps have trouble trying to beat 1 percent distortion over the audio range. So that would yield a very obvious residual difference.

Ethan Winer Thanks for updating this guys Statement, Thanks for teaching us

Yes, great point.

I don't know, Ethan always comes across to me as being a little too cocky. I recall seeing a video of his home listening room and it appeared rather junky to me. There are musicians who are technically adept and then there are artists who inject emotion into their music. I'm not saying at all that I think $1K interconnects are necessary but rather than debate Paul, I would like to see Ethan have a conversation with Nelson Pass.

@@falconquest2068 Why? Because Nelson Pass has any type of superiority over the rest of people interested in high quality reproduced sound? Sorry. Nelson Pass is just an audio designer with a lot of non scientific prejudices, like too many others.

@@falconquest2068 Not cocky, but confident and with good reason. He simply knows what is to Paul a mystery. I know this because I too know what Ethan knows and Paul doesn't.

Yes, they're petty good for $100 computer speakers.

I challenge Paul not on wires, but on all the bad advice and outright mis-truths he spreads with his videos. A lot of people want to know the truth, and much of what Paul says is simply not true.

This is from my article in the current issue of audioXpress magazine. The entire article will be on their web site in a few more weeks: It’s important to mention that sound stage and imaging have nothing to do with electronics. There's nothing a preamp or wire etc can do to affect imaging, though frequency response changes can affect apparent depth slightly, with less treble making instruments and voices sound farther back. The width and depth of stereo placement, and imaging effects, are mostly a function of echoes and reverb in the original source recording. Untamed reflections in your own listening room can only damage imaging. Further, contrary to popular belief stereo width can be measured. The device that does this is called a Phase Correlation Meter, and it shows the amount and phase of left-right channel differences. Recording studios use this to verify mono compatibility, to ensure that nothing in a stereo recording will be lost if the two channels are reduced to mono.

As for "instrument separation" I need you to explain exactly what that is before I can answer. Wording like that means different things to different people.

That is exactly one reason for a debate. When two positions are irreconcilable and both arguing they do not try to convince each other but the public.

No, you haven't hear a difference you only think you did. My Null tester demo proves this. You really need to watch that video, it's linked in the description. The issue is the frailty of human hearing. You think you hear a difference between wires, but there is no difference. At least not with most wires. So this is the answer, and you and Paul will either have to accept it or be forever wrong. There's no other way to say it.

Everyone who owns a stereo hears a difference every day they turn it on.

What LD said, and also Rise Time.

LOL, if you watch the video you'll see exactly how this all works. And the answer is Yes, the null test absolutely proves the point.

@@EthanWiner I saw you demonstrate the null via speaker playback and the video recording mic but did not see a detailed spectrum analysis of the null resultant, ie have you ruled out low level harmonic differences, this would not be evident on a VU meter and perhaps not on simply listening via a speaker especially with so much circuit noise present in the gain makeup

LD Blake ok but just asking if that was measured and quantified, just a basic question about control conditions not disputing anything

@@steveg219 All that remained in the null residual is noise, none of the music. That's shown clearly on the 'scope display. I don't even know what "low level harmonic differences" means.

Ethan Winer lets say harmonics in the program material at 10k we’re not perfectly cancelled by the null and remained at very low levels, That could account for two wires sounding different to the ear. Again, not disputing, just asking if these conditions were controlled for

One way to measure width is with a phase correlation meter. Mixing engineers use this to assess mono compatibility, to ensure that no elements will drop out when a stereo mix is reduced to mono. For example over AM radio or for music on hold. But generally, width and sound stage, or whatever you like to call it, is all about left-right channel differences. Mono music has no width at all, of course. A common technique in rock music is to have the rhythm guitar player play the same part twice. Then one track is panned hard left and the other hard right. Because these are different performances the two parts are never exactly in sync. And this creates a huge very wide sound. I've done similar using a rhythm guitar on one side and an electric piano on the other. Both are playing the same chords but, again, the differences create a very pleasing wide sound. In fact, this can be *too* wide, so it's common to pull the two parts in a little so they're not panned fully left and fully right.

I'll add that classical music is often recorded with two main microphones, then additional "spot" mics are placed close to softer instruments like the harp, or a soloist playing a concerto. But the main mics pick up different parts of the orchestra, and the natural reverb they capture is also different left and right. When mixing pop music we almost always use stereo reverb, and that can make even a single performer placed in the middle sound large and wide.

@@EthanWiner thank you for the answer. The reason i ask is because i have 2 amplifiers, one is cheap and the other one is a little more expensive. I can test it over and over, and know which has better depth and layering. If i use that correlation meter, will that show the difference in amps? Also is there an acceptable measure for depth and layering using the correlation meter?

Thinking about this further, width isn't something you'd usually measure directly, but you could. If you subtract the left and right channels, similar to how my Null Tester works, whatever remains is the difference amount. If the left and right channels are totally different, then the width is at maximum. So I guess this "measurement" would be expressed as a percentage of the sum of the left and right channels. This video explains my Null Tester in detail: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/kN-Hp5acprSlY4U.html

There's nothing an amplifier type circuit can do to affect the width or depth of music. Width and depth are related to left-right channel differences as I already mentioned, and also the strength and timing of reflections, both single echoes and reverb (which is just more and denser echoes). Assuming both of your amplifiers are working correctly, I'll bet you $100 that you would not be able to tell which one sounds "wider" in a proper blind test.

Realistically? :->) My aim is to educate people so they won't waste their money on audio nonsense like overpriced wires and outright bullshit. Paul spreads a lot of nonsense, and in the large picture such nonsense dumbs down society. Call it fake news if you will.

Well, so much goes without saying. However, it always seems to me that such battles against ... shall we call it “superstition and it's priesthood and followers” ... are impossible to win. I admire your zeal and wish you success and good luck, and of course educating people is of paramount importance. But direct combat never benefits any one. I could quote a few old sayings that I'm sure you're familiar with, like “before you go to war against your enemy, dig two graves”, or “if you can't win a war, don't fight it”. Chances are of course that he won't accept the challenge, and then what have you achieved? Nothing, basically. Better just to tell people that they should never trust a salesman.

@@skakdosmer Right, of course Paul wont accept my challenge! He has a vested interest in keeping people confused and ignorant. But there's nothing inherently wrong with salespeople. Many are competent and honest.

Yes, of course. If only more people understood these simple facts.

@@EthanWiner This was Linns philosophy with the Linn Sondek LP12 Turntable. It still is with their overpriced Klimax streamer.

Ethan Winer indicated in a reply to this same question early on from another commenter that Paul McGowan initially agreed to the debate, but subsequently changed his mind and backed out.

Initially he agreed, but then he backed out when I tried to set a date.

James Randi offered $1 Million, and so far 20(?) years later not one person has stepped forward to try to claim it.

@@EthanWiner Somehow I don't think that James Randi would allow the correct identification of interconnects as part of his psychic challenge. I used to be able to identify different interconnects with pretty good accuracy, but my hearing isn't what it used to be, but I do know someone that can absolutely pick interconnects out with much better than 50/50 odds. Where are you located? If Paul McGowan doesn't accept your offer, maybe the guy I know will. And concerning James Randi's challenge, you might find this article an interesting read: www.dailygrail.com/2008/02/the-myth-of-the-million-dollar-challenge/

@@bentonpix I'm in western Connecticut, and I'm glad to have anyone who believes they can "hear" wires visit me for a lesson in why they can't. :->)

@@EthanWiner The person I'm thinking of lives in NJ, so it's not an impossible meeting. So if they correctly identify their cable (which is their own design) out of a random line up that you provide, you'd have to chalk it up to luck? Or do you have to first find a nulled match of that cable in order not to be able to hear any difference?

@@bentonpix Yes, the first hurdle is ensuring the wires null, which I'm sure they will unless it's some goofy wire with a Bybee type lump in the middle to intentionally color the sound. So once that's satisfied, I'll swap wires while your friend listens, and he has to be correct every time. For a 1.6% confidence you have to be right least six times out of six. To reduce the odds of guessing correctly to only 0.8% requires being right seven times in a row.

Paul is an idiot who says also "it's bit-perfect but the bits have noise" to digital interconnects

@LD Blake yep you are preaching to the choir here. Signal analysis on the voltages we send to our speakers is a basic and fundamental process for those of us who are in the field.

Like Carnac The Magnificent!

Yes, most modern audio electronic devices are clean enough to be "transparent," so by definition they all sound the same. Of course, power amps vary by how much power they can output. So a 25 watt amp driven into distortion won't sound the same as a 300 watt amp that remains undistorted. In the larger picture, the best way to assess audio products is by their published specs rather than listening which is fraught with problems. This video explains all about how audio fidelity is defined and measured: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/kNyZpciml7mrioE.html

There's also a huge amount of information about this large topic on my web site Articles page. Not just how audio works and is measured, but several articles explaining *why* people believe they hear differences that don't really exist: ethanwiner.com/articles.html

@@EthanWiner Thank you very much for the reply. I appreciate it.

@Score Mix See, that's why they need a mod!

@@periurban I fully agree. Although I have some pre-disposed opinions on the matter, these two GIANTS outweigh them in every way. As a seasoned P.Eng myself (Mech) I'd volunteer to provide transparent and well experienced moderation if they'd like.

@@CraftAero You should approach them.

James Randi, please :)))

Yes but this moderator better be technically astute enough, and have a good BS detector.

Initially Paul agreed, but when I tried to set up a date and time he backed out. For obvious reasons.

Who really gives a F--K, just sit back and enjoy the music!

@@robertm.5816 mixing & mastering is one of those things that never gets the credit it deserves cos its the art of hiding flaws so ya never knew they were there, & never knew what went into making it right.

You need to watch the Null Tester video linked in the video description above. If you watch the entire video you'll see that it *proves* there are no differences in the four wires compared. So Paul is wrong that not everything can be measured.

@@EthanWiner This means that Paul doesn't know for sure what he designs.

Initially Paul agreed, but when I tried to set it up he reneged. No real surprise.

@ THD is outdated. Science have developed much better metrics. google nonlinear distortion audibility.

Denis In your dreams....

Cool Audio Hacks Whatever... the claim is : you cannot measure sound... omg what does a Analogue to digital converter (ADC) do? what is the data that comes out from a ADC other then sound in the time domain? in other words sound pressure being measured and quantized 1 Giga times per second ( on a simple normal 1GSPS scope). unfortunnatly this discussion will never end ...there is an all industry being fed on ignorance. I think it would be better to assume this expensive gear is no more than pieces of art, not techicaly superior, but beautiflly crafted with art and good (expensive) taste. Does Mona Lisa reproduces its subject better than an ordinary modern camera would? course not but is not the reason why it is so valuable, right. its about art... So please be at least inteligent and play on your areas of comfort and expertise... don’t mix science with beliefs... I think every loudspeaker / amp dont need to cost more than 1k to reproduce more than what you are able to hear. You may put diamonds on it and it will be more expensive...Still read the same measurements... but it may sound better... placebo effect

@@antoniolucena7304 Agreed. I'm pretty sure Paul knows about this video but he purposely ignores it.

Denis exactly!

This is for the benefit of people who actually want to know the truth, and who don't want to waste their limited funds. Whether on nonsense products that do nothing (replacement power wires), or products that cost much more than usual but are no better ($4,000 CD players).

Hmmm....... So , what you're saying is Paul is not being truthful about HIS personal subjective PERCEPTIONS ! (Please stop 'Canonizing' AES beliefs as there is a much greater Archive of Sound Mediocrity amongst Professionally recorded music than there is of well recorded music . The saying goes "The proof is in the Pudding." The pudding of much recorded sound does not gel very well at all !!! (& that's my Truth: Or do you only measure things that suit your needs)

@@steveassante6797 I am saying that Paul is not being truthful in the facts of audio science. This has nothing to do with perception or opinion. Please don't try to obfuscate that which is very simple. I'll add that if most recorded music sounds poor (doesn't "gel") on your system, the problem is most likely a lack of room treatment. I'm always amazed at audiophiles who invests thousands of dollars into wires and expensive gear, hoping to achieve that elusive last 1%, while ignoring peak/null spans of 20-30 dB caused by room acoustics.

You don't bother to debate with fools.

@@RandyShirley Paul is the fool.

Someone who designs circuits or components, or records or mixes music, or designs entire systems, etc. Selling audio products is not engineering.

Check out the link....All will become clear.

Thanks, check out some of my audio educational videos: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/kNyZpciml7mrioE.html

There's no such thing as two wires (or anything else) that measure the same but sound different.

@@EthanWiner just because two wires measure the same and you don't hear a difference doesn't proof that others also don't hear a difference. Edit: instead of throwing claims at each other the whole thing could so easily be settled with a blind listening test

@LD Blake if the difference is just imaginary, then again a blind listening test will solve this. Also, what makes you so sure that not hearing a difference is not a trick by your brain as well, because you DON'T want to hear a difference?

@@Simon-dn9kv Yes, a blind test is fine, but even better is my Null Tester demo that *proves* all four wires I compared sound the same, with no chance that "others" might hear a difference: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/kN-Hp5acprSlY4U.html

@@EthanWiner The brain is able to notice differences which shouldn't make a difference, like lowering the noise floor from -180db to -200db, which Rob Watts did proof. Now I'm wondering, would your Null Test be able to detect said noise floor difference?

Yes I believe that could be done with appropriate attenuators on his box. And the squash the resistive dummy load quandry, if you can find a speaker with 500w power handling, like a stage touring array, you could use a real speaker load (although probably not in the same room!) There you go! Next idea to discredit the null test? P.S. You do realize there is no such thing as a perfect square wave? Infinite rise time? Not in this universe!

@Andy Delle Of course there is no "perfect" in our universe. That's just a "nitpicky" statement as one would normally assume "as close to perfect" as possible in this flawed universe. I'll just assume you are Trolling as my question was addressed to Ethan and clearly not you.

@Andy Delle AND, my question was just that, a question. As you seem to be Trolling I guess you "Assume" this was something you can Troll about. FYI, I am interested in finding out if there is a difference and if so what was it and what Ethan's analysis might be either way.

@@1dir951 This is a public forum. If you want to ask Ethan a question personally, then use EMAIL. It is quite acceptable for others to answer questions publicly. If I took your legitimate question as sarcastic, I apologize. But it did seem to me like another poke to discredit the null test. And I am hardly a troll - ask Ethan that. I am just one of those here who have a personal issue with all the audiophool crap. People are certainly free to buy what ever they want including fashion statements. Hell that's a multi billion industry on its own. The difference is that Prada is not making claims that their purse makes your cell phone achieve better coverage. Yet the audio trinkets industry freely uses junk science to sell their snake oil! that should at least be disclosed.

@@andydelle4509 I think that should be infinitesimal (as in '0') rise time.

How the speaker sounds is not the issue, its how the cables test against other cables, and in your case how each cable you made would test against its twin. If each channel sounded the same i.e. like an incandescent lamp in the series, then it would tend to prove Ethan's point. Cables that test the same cannot sound different. But without being able to test those cables its pointless to talk about how they sounded in comparison to other untested cables. Though I would like to hear those massive cables! :)

Mr. Gowan addressed the question of "impossible to measure"in audio because there are not yet electrical tools that can duplicate how the human ears, inside a head, and then finally by the brain processes signals to create hearing.

Not only do flat speakers sound good to my ears, they sound good to everyone. Sean Olive of Harman fame did extensive research, summarized here: www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=12206 As for my preference, there's good pro gear and bad, and good audiophile gear and bad. I prefer good of either type.

Yes, of course it's well known that people imagine hearing things that don't exist. But the purpose of the null tester is to prove that a $3 RCA wire sounds the same as a much more expensive wire with BS "directional arrows." So for whatever reason people think Wire A sounds "better" than Wire B, they'd save a lot of money if they understood the difference was imagined and not real. There's also this: ethanwiner.com/believe.html

RB so true and well said. For my listening room, no amount of magic products or electronic upgrades came close to what proper acoustical treatment has done.

Everybody already knows acoustic treatment, speaker positioning, listening position etc, is essential in getting the best listening experience. McGowen often talks about this... however, I've never heard him mention "audio magic". Electronics, cables, speakers, room treatments.... it ALL makes a difference!

@@cranestance8316 - Yet few people understand that acoustics play the biggest roll in what the listener hears. I'm speaking about home use in rooms which are roughly "living room" size, home theater, home recording studio, etc.

@@cranestance8316 - Most audio sales people don't specifically mention "audio magic" but it is heavily implied. How many audio sales people ever mention "acoustic treatment" to their customers?

RB I agree 100%! I bought a lot of bass traps my current traps etc. from Ethan. Made a world of difference in my listening experience! This is far more important to me than any kind of cable measurement!

Yes, and that reply was No. Of course he refused. He knows he can't defend his nonsense.

Then it all changed when the ad revenue fell because the high priced manufacturers got their panties in a wad.

Those people just didn't have "sensitive enough ears" - kidding.

Funny , I'm running an entry level 2018 Pioneer VSX-522 receiver in my hi fi and I wouldn't trade it for ANYTHING, it's absolutely transparent, smooth as silk, perfect bass, perfect mids, perfect highs, perfect soundstage, perfect depth, non detectable noise or distortion, no glare, tizz, opaqueness, no listening fatigue, no coloration, . . it does EVERYTHING the ridiculously expensive pre amp/ power Amp setups do, and just as well. Now if I hit the lottery and could afford Wilson Audio speakers then of COURSE I'd partner them with a higher priced front end , probably Dan D'Agastino or Constellation or such. . . But would I be gaining anything in all those aforementioned parameters?. . .probably not, only sheer power to drive the bigger speakers and more electricity used to listen to the system. . . Pioneer receiver + Paradigm top end speakers = end game for many lucky listeners😎

It's simple - the resistance of a fucking speaker cable is meaningless in the chain and even if it don't matter because it is linear - so a piece more on the volume control would make it gone - idiots waste money for cables, smart people nail the money on walls for acoustics which is 50% of what you hear

Marantz SA8005 CD player, Classe' Audio preamp/ amp, Sonus Faber Auditor M speakers, canare 4s11 speaker cables. MidFi by most standards.

Musical Fidelity DAC, Transport & Dual mono integrated. B&W 804d2.

Tidal - Chord DAC - Cambridge CXA60 - Epos ES11. Very basic but musical system.

Hard Drive speaker

mag 1981 I have an excellent system, in fact I have about 5 audiophile systems . Most of my components have been on a class A rated reviewers guide. I just look at Ethan's videos when I want to get a laugh at a "box wine person" who thinks he is saving money because his ripple gets you drunk for less money than a bottle of Veve Cliquot ( the buzz ain't the same) . I think most people who own crap sounding systems love Ethan because they think somehow their systems are as good as much more expensive ones. Ethan's advice is good for making her public address systems in the NYC subways, but not for sound enjoyment. And Ethan's association with with Tufts just shows he found a person with a greater level of ignorance there.

Thanks for the nice note, Felix.

Thanks Ethan! I remember having a hard time accepting the objective mindset when it comes to home audio at first. Especially that all competently designed hifi amps sounds the same (when operated below clipping). Being a musician and rock guitar player first I assumed that amplifiers do have have a sonic signature and a large impact (as a guitar amp has when you're actually creating the music). It didn't help that my brother, several friends and (seemingly) every mainstream audio magazine appeared to be convinced that everything from amps and cd-transports to digital cables make a profound and obvious difference. A couple of unnecessary purchases, a significant amount of money (to me) spent, a growing suspicion plus some testing later it became obvious. Everyones either deluded or full of shit. You're making everyone a great service by pushing back against the self-appointed esoteric high priests and teaching people what really matters, both in home and pro audio. I fear a lot of young people might be scared away (by the high prices and snobbish attitude of the pseudo experts that is) and less likely to pursue good sound in their living rooms, studios or musical projects if it were not for people like you. I know I almost was when starting out. Btw, I just bought your book. Looking forward to reading it. And btw a second time, I'm also a great lover of cats. We (my wife and I) just learned that our beautiful 10 year old cat lady suffers from asthma (she had a bad cough). Fortunately that's very treatable and we're giving her medicine now. And that's thanks to science and science minded vets! If we had been listening to the veterinary equivalent of audiofools we've might ended up giving our beloved kitty a homeopathic cure or some other mumbo-jumbo.

By the Ethan I've got a question for you. The main factors deciding the perceived sound of a particular headphone would be frequency response, distortion and channel matching right? Why is it that open back headphone sounds more spacious and well open than a closed backs even when the fr and distortion specs are similar? Or do they actually? Is the preference for open back headphones also entirely subjective? Or could the difference be explained by frequency response after all? Or put another way. I were to take a typical and well regarded closed back headphone like the AKG371 and eq it to the Harman target and then do the same with a good open backed hp like the Sennheiser HD600 would there be any difference or will they sound exactly the same?

I'm not a headphones expert, but my understanding is that open back types don't have strong reflections coming back to the driver cone. And the cone is not sealed in a tiny cavity. So if they sound different, then their frequency responses are in fact different. They'd have to be!

@@EthanWiner Thanks Ethan. That sounds logical. So then. If you have a headphone with low distortion that takes well to EQ it should't really matter if the design is open or not. I have a couple of really good closed backs and was thinking of buying an open set as well. But now it seems I really don't need to. You just saved me some money (which I intended to spend at a nice italian restaurant with my lady instead).

The people who claim to have "highly resolving" system usually have no acoustic treatment at all. So what they actually have is a muddy mess that hides a lot of detail. And they don't even know it.

@Tank You might think you hear a difference between wires, but you really don't. You need to watch the Null Tester video linked in this video description above. If you watch the entire video you'll see that it *proves* there are no differences in the four wires compared. You should also read the two short articles linked there that explain clearly why people believe they hear differences that do not exist.

What you're comparing then is the resistance, not the cable material...

But can you explain how they "sound different"? In treble content etc. or in volume? No response means you are imagining things. If you CAN actually answer I might believe you. But if you can't explain how it sounds "different" then obviously it just doesn't.

Yes, unless one or both of the wires are poorly made or defective. Though for speaker wires, the wires must be thick enough for the required amount of power. So for these reasons, I usually phrase it as "all *competent* wires pass audio the same, and therefore sound the same."

@@EthanWiner well, the thing is that Speaker cables DO sound different. And that is the fact. I've heard it xx times, and do the testing on a daily basis.

I'm sure you believe that you've heard differences between speaker wires. But assuming both wires are competent (there's that word again), your perception is simply wrong. This is the main problem with too many audiophiles, and even some professionals: You don't understand the limits of your own hearing memory, and you don't understand the need for a proper blind test or even how to do such a test. You also don't understand that simply moving your head a few inches makes a real change in the response reaching your ears. All of this is well documented, and available to anyone willing to spend a few hours learning. I assume you want to be knowledgeable about this wonderful hobby of ours. So start here, then come back and we'll have the basis for an educated discussion: www.soundonsound.com/people/sounding-wire ethanwiner.com/believe.html kzfaq.info/get/bejne/kN-Hp5acprSlY4U.html kzfaq.info/get/bejne/eL-En7Fn3NDHpoU.html