Plain ole user
I am open minded but this is where I have to question the veracity of what you are saying. If there is indeed a difference in the sound and not just a difference in what you believe you are hearing, it should be measurable and there MUST be a mechanism in the properties of the components and their interaction with the signal that can be studied, discovered and quantified. To argue otherwise completely destroys any credibility in the science that is purported to be behind your claims. I am stunned that you would say that there is no mechanism that results in the differences you claim. If there is not then there is no physical difference in the sound. Your statement is a complete rejection of the possibility of any science being involved here.That is exactly the point. There is none. They simply sound different. That is what Danny and I are trying to convey. The math falls apart when faced with the reality of perception. There are some things That either can't be measured or are poopooed as insignificant by the math. Dielectric absorption of the insulator is just one example. Quite frankly speaking, I don't care about the math involved much any more. Certainly it is the starting point from which a good cable is designed. It is the foundation upon which the cable voice is built. Yes there is a process there, too. Some things sound bad, some things sound good, others fall somewhere in between. Building a "good sounding" cable is a cut and try process. Basically it comes down to whether we believe our ears or not. I do. I am a certified trained listener because I took the course in ear training and I passed the tests. I even have a certificate around here somewhere stating that I did. That is unless Gayle threw it away in one of her "cleaning and clearing" binges. Don't care much about the awards. I just do what I do. I'm not out to try to impress anyone. I do what I do for the love of the music. I had a career in the semiconductor industry ended when Philips Semiconductor pulled up shop in the USA. As an Implant Technician I worked on what we call the death ray and I learned a lot about how things really do work down to an atomic scale. I know materials, material purity, cryogenics and changes of energy states very well. I am not an electrical engineer. I build things that work. I know how they work, why they work and can predict what the effects of a particular cable will be on a given piece of gear because I have done the work to find out the hows', whys' and wherefores' of my gig. My son in law Brian is a lead engineer for ASM. They provide tools and services for the semiconductor industry, primarily Intel. He calls me a Mad Scientist. Maybe so. Call me crazy. Maybe so.
If there is a difference that is not just belief or psychological in nature, then we have to be able to map it to the physics and electrical theory. If you are not willing to attempt to do so, I see nothing interesting about your arguments.
Frankly, I believe there are more differences in components than most "objectivists" would believe, but most are not meaningful in most cases. If there are, they may be hard to measure, hard to define, and obscure, but that does not mean it can't or shouldn't be done. We have some extremely powerful tools these days that should be able to measure and model such differences, if anyone really wanted to do so. The belief of many is that those who promote the mysticism of audio have no equity in the actual facts because many of their claims will be proven either false or meaningless. Based on your argument above, I'd say that perspective is gaining credibility. You are your own arguments best antagonist with statements like this.