James Randi Offers $1M for Golden Ears to Successfully Differentiate High-End Cables

**Otto** · **10-23-07, 03:34 PM**

Quote:

eugovector wrote:

This latest exchange really is embarrassing for both side, regardless of how I personally feel.

No kiddin'. I like James Randi, but this whole thing makes both sides look like a bunch of name-calling babies. I hope they can work something out in the name of the test, but I'd prefer it be with as little animosity as possible.

**Doug Plumb** · **10-23-07, 04:03 PM**

"Care to link or elaborate?"

They didn't like that I was slaying them in an argument so they posted me personal info on their group. Many other underhanded tricks.

**eugovector** · **10-23-07, 07:59 PM**

Tell you what, put me down for $20. Let's raise the money, and personally ask Michael to make this happen.

Total reached: $20
Goal: $7400
Needed:$7380

**terry j** · **10-23-07, 08:43 PM**

Quote:

Doug Plumb wrote:

"Care to link or elaborate?"

They didn't like that I was slaying them in an argument so they posted me personal info on their group. Many other underhanded tricks.

Was that randii personally or just the whole 'gang'. It can get very 'fanlike' on the forums etc.

This must be some sort of indication of what goes on all the time in the paranormal area. I think it would wear me down quite quickly.

I have seen MF speak and write like that before, possibly on one of the 'rebel' audio sites like Peter Aczel or something. Seems his communications (when upset) all come out of the same mold.

Surely the reference $16 000 cables are suitable? Sure, they might not have been described as danceable, but a quick review somewhere can change that. Either expensive high blown audiophool speaker cables are snake oil or they ain't. Don't see what the name on it has to do with anything.

**10-24-07, 11:29 AM**

The biggest problem with the test is that Randi gets to pick the cables.

What if it were he, and you got to pick the cables and the equipment?

**Otto** · **10-24-07, 11:59 AM**

Well, it started with Randi picking the cables that were reviewed by MF.

I believe that if they could put the name calling aside, they would be able to decide on a cable together. Certainly there's some manufacturer out there that has enough faith in their cables to loan out a pair for this.

Randi should also consider using MF's reference cable, assuming that it can be tested for any type of tampering.

**terry j** · **10-27-07, 06:24 AM**

After doing a bit of reading on this, I must admit to a bit of sympathy for MF, I feel he has been treated a little shabbily.

His 'bedside manners' can leave a bit to be desired at times, but would I be any more polite under the circumstances??

His role in this seems to be a very reasonable one to me, he was willing to take the test after the very logical step of first hearing the pear cables and determining if he felt he could tell them apart or not (to date he hasn't heard them).

When Pear pulled out (NOT MF) he got a little of the backlash directed towards him, and it also seems that he was suggesting alternative tests that could be undertaken.

So my hat goes off to MF for being brave and honest in all this, seems that Randii could also have had a bit more decorum and tact, all that while basically agreeing with his stance on the matter.

Lets hope that not too much anger has built up here, and some sort of agreed upon test can still take place.

I felt that I needed to say this because (hangs head in shame) I too at one stage was ''''laughing'''' at MF, I now believe he just got caught in the crossfire.

Latest that I could find

http://www.gadgetsclub.com/component...mid,8/p,44038/

**alan monro** · **10-27-07, 06:43 AM**

That is incredible to think that some gifted people can hear electrons moving in a copper wire at the speed of light , I am certainly not one of those people , and i am not gullible also . Alan .

**imbeaujp** · **10-27-07, 08:35 AM**

I agree that there is a difference between 10$ cables and 100$ cables. I did many many tests with cables form 100 to 1000$ and more (A-B Blind test) and I can not ear any difference. Sorry, I can't.

All my Rotel components are connect with Monster Cable THX 1000. Got them on ebay for 25$ each.

If you want to really improve your system, put money on room enhencement, not in cables.

Anyway, it's always funny to read about cables...

LOL

**drf** · **10-27-07, 05:27 PM**

the one thing I have noticed about people who are hellbent on debunking something (usualy psuedoscience or religion), like Randi, they tend to get more agressive as there knowledge and wisdom of the topic diminishes. This is not to say Randi is wrong about anything, it just tends to show his knowledge is not quite as "in-depth" as he makes out. I have noticed very similar attributes in people who try to debunk all sorts of common beliefs including things like chiropractic care. Strong language and carefully worded insults do not help anyone.

I say bring an unbiased third party, I.E the CSIRO or American equivilent to do the testing.

My 2c. (I wish I had all the 2c that people give around here, I'd be richer than Randi!!

)

**toecheese** · **10-27-07, 06:21 PM**

I've been following the challenge (read it first on digg,but interestingly enough, it has been digg-spammed, which means it (links from JREF) *can't* appear on digg).

I think it is lame that a company that sells $7k? $14k? speaker wires can't put their product up for a test. If I were to assert that my cables were the best thing since sliced bread, I should have no issues with doing side-by-side comparisons. The fact that they chickened out is enough for me to postulate that they can't back up their claims (though to be fair, I don't know if they actually claimed it- the reviewer said they were 'danceable')

As far as whoever the SCREAMER is wanting to test his own 'reference' cables- I'd give him a red flag. As other have pointed out, you can make wires which actually degrade sound, and him being able to test his own and know the 'rolloff at x frequency' is bad.

The initial $1M test offered as I read it was the Pear wires versus some overpriced monster cables. That's it. No changing the rules, unless you want to make your own contest.

**terry j** · **10-27-07, 09:30 PM**

Quote:

toecheese wrote:

I've been following the challenge

As far as whoever the SCREAMER is wanting to test his own 'reference' cables- I'd give him a red flag. As other have pointed out, you can make wires which actually degrade sound, and him being able to test his own and know the 'rolloff at x frequency' is bad.

The initial $1M test offered as I read it was the Pear wires versus some overpriced monster cables. That's it. No changing the rules, unless you want to make your own contest.

The 'screamer' you alluded to is based on the assumption that MF would deliberately set out to defraud, ie tinker with his $16 000 cables in order to win (or indeed that they measure badly in the first place). I don't know enough about him to comment on the first part, and the claims are always that 'we can hear things measurements can't tell us' so (I'm assuming) that they should measure fine out of the box. In any case, the point is that MF put that up as a possibilty and Randii was actively considering it. Evidently he decided against it because of the POSSIBILITY of factors such as you mentioned, fair enough I say. Note, that should not reflect on MF's credibility in my book.

DRF I also agree with a lot of what you say, but I would add that I feel Randii would have a lot of resources to fall back on in the areas that he personally would not be completely up to speed on. The counter to your observation is of course that the onus is not on him to DISPROVE anything,rather it is the reverse and to date.....

**drf** · **10-28-07, 03:59 AM**

Terry, I agree whole heartedly. the owness is always to prove rather than disprove. I would certainly hope if he is going to defame a buisness/person publically that he would have some decent proof behing him rather than just smart words is all I'm saying.

I have an idea, they can compare my DIY cables to the monster brand and if someone picks my cables as the better quality I will sell them for the meagre audiophile price of $19,000.

**Rex** · **11-07-07, 04:56 AM**

Quote:

jmprader wrote:

Goodness gracious, Darren. You have forgotten the most important element. Your AC power supply. Why, here in Cali, when we hooked it up to Sierra Club approved hydroelectric generated power versus coal and nuclear powered sources, it's unbelievable what a difference it makes...but nothing like when we listened to ordinary source material powered with AC produced through lead free solar pv panels supported by virgin Yew boughs with the power routed through 100% long grain cryo treated copper wire to inverters that Tibetan monks hand wound and blessed with a sprinkling of 3000 year old snow melt from a snow cave in the Himalayas...we saw the truth...danceable? foot tapping? nothing!...we are talking removing the veil baby...pass the Yohimbe please.

Yeah, cables...

**warnerwh** · **11-09-07, 12:17 AM**

This may sound hard to believe but I can easily hear the difference of not just speaker cables but putting styro foam cups under these cables to keep them away from my carpet with all the static electricity. Some times I've learned that just moving a cable 2" will have a profound effect on the quality of sound. Sometimes all the bass will just "disappear". You'll have to excuse me now because I have to go back to my padded room.

What gets me is that people will spend thousands on cable and have no acoustic treatments. They probably don't know that you can hear the difference between the acoustics of rooms. I've seen a couple very expensive systems here in town and pics on the net, including reviewers from Print magazines, that have awful rooms. As a matter of fact I've lost nearly all respect for reviewers. Whatever they say should be questioned.

**Scuba Diver** · **11-09-07, 01:14 AM**

I can not believe how many of your are still using wire. I have just upgraded from wire to these amazing lazer cables. The red beams pulsate when sound travels through the air. I can get you a pair for just $159,999.00 if you are interested. The sound quality is untouchable. Don't believe me? Buy a pair and listen for yourself.

If you pull a weed from your yard and put a price on it, someone will buy it. Why would speaker wiring be any different?

**terry j** · **11-09-07, 04:32 AM**

Quote:

warnerwh wrote:

This may sound hard to believe but I can easily hear the difference of not just speaker cables but putting styro foam cups under these cables to keep them away from my carpet with all the static electricity. Some times I've learned that just moving a cable 2" will have a profound effect on the quality of sound. Sometimes all the bass will just "disappear". You'll have to excuse me now because I have to go back to my padded room.

you nearly got me!!! At least your padded room would sound better than some of the room setups you see on the net!!

Well, looks this one has died and is starting to emit a bad smell. Pity, but would a test of any description have put a subject like this to bed?? I doubt it, so I've made a decision to let people have their way and spend $10 000 on a set of cables of any description if they wish, it's their money and they can do with it as they please.

My only lingering annoyance factor is that the purveyors of said cables get away with the outlandish claims, seemingly knowing full well they will never get challenged.

If only all products sold were subjected to the same stringent studies that are needed in other fields.....like proof of claims??

**Rex** · **11-09-07, 06:34 AM**

More than thirty years ago, Stereo Review magazine addressed the issue of golden ears and magical equipment. As I recall, they conducted some double-blind tests and found the highly-hyped and over-priced esoteric products to be monsterously preposterous.

A friend of mine used to teach at Oklahoma State University. He told me about the cowchip tossing contest they have there. He also told me they have dried and lacquered cowchips in an art museum. There are people who will buy dried cowchip and hang them on their walls in their homes. If people will put cowchips on their wall, is it any surprise they will buy exotic cables made of unobtainium for $300 a foot?

**eugovector** · **11-19-07, 01:02 PM**

The latest:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=941184

Apparently the folks at AVS took my view and just did their own test. I'll leave the results as a surprise...

Edit: Oh, and the "Mike", is not Michael Fremer, but Mike Lavigne. Don't know anything about him.

**Doug Plumb** · **11-19-07, 01:13 PM**

I think someone should set up a speaker and mic carefully to measure a near-field response with and without the expensive cables. The mic doesn't need to be calibrated.

Several measurements with and without the expensive cables should be done so that normal measurement variations are seen in context.

If the expensive cables make a difference the result should show up in the frequency response.

Any cable differences that exist will show up in frequency response.

**Anthony** · **11-19-07, 02:08 PM**

You make a good point, Doug. Although I think more than just frequency response should be measured for completeness. I don't know how cables could lower distortion or spectral decay, but it seems worth a quick measure. Group delay might also be interesting as well.

I've got some MITs at home. I think I'll try this later this week. 14 gauge, versus MIT -- same amp, source, and gain. I'll try it with the Magnepans, since I know they have a very flat frequency response from 100 to 20kHz.

**Doug Plumb** · **11-19-07, 02:23 PM**

All physical effects that affect audibility will show up in the frequency response. Group delay is not audible unless it is affecting frequency response.

"I've got some MITs at home. I think I'll try this later this week. 14 gauge, versus MIT"

Some of these cables have a little box at one end with a cap and resistor - this is to change frequency response and make the cables sound different than ordinary cables. The listener concludes that different is better when it costs more. In this case nothing could be further than the truth. If the error in freq response that the cables provide cancel another error then the cables will sound better.

If the box gives a slight increase in HF levels then the cables will sound "faster".

A "faster" sound or "better transient response" is always directly associated with a small boost in HF response.

**Doug Plumb** · **11-19-07, 02:31 PM**

BTW, with maggies or any other flat speaker in particular its very important that the mic not move even a fraction of a fraction of a hair while comparing measurements between two cables. Repeat the experiment several times and be careful you don't move the maggies while pulling and putting wires into the connectors.

Make sure you are far away from the direct sound path, the mic and the speaker when doing this.

Differences will be in HF's so you can use small gate times of less than 1 ms. No point in comparing LF responses they will not differ.

**terry j** · **11-19-07, 11:39 PM**

Quote:

Doug Plumb wrote:

I think someone should set up a speaker and mic carefully to measure a near-field response with and without the expensive cables. The mic doesn't need to be calibrated.

Several measurements with and without the expensive cables should be done so that normal measurement variations are seen in context.

If the expensive cables make a difference the result should show up in the frequency response.

Any cable differences that exist will show up in frequency response.

Not sure if this would work doug, after all is not the claim that there are indeed differences the ears can hear that cannot be shown with measurements??

Not saying i buy it in regards to cables, but is it not true?? Let's make an 'intellectual experiment'. And for the sake of this 'experiment', lets make an assumption that it can be done in theory, if not in practice.

Let us, by whatever means needed (say a Cray computer of the most power imaginable) and use, for example, dsp to have two different speakers measure exactly the same in an anechoic response. Now, if one is an electrostatic say, and the other an unbelievably complex five way say, is it true that if they measure exactly the same they will indeed sound the same??

I'm curious what people would think, I would say that they wouldn't sound the same regardless of how arbitrarily close we can get the measurements. Of course I can't back that up, I have no experience in the area.

But if I'm right, then to some degree we can say that measurements aren't the complete story?

**Sonnie** · **11-20-07, 12:47 AM**

Would the two different speakers even have to be electrostatic vs dynamic?

What about two dynamic speakers... say Paradigm vs. B&W?

If speakers measure the same exact frequency response regardless of the brand, does that make them all sound the exact same?

Advertisement