One of the frequent tactics of the hifi mags is to evoke science in
support of opinions which then in turn are said to support the subjective
enterprise as legitimate because some scientific terms have been tossed
around here and there. One good example is the stereophile online
article:

'Nirvana Audio S-X Ltd. loudspeaker cable'

http://www.stereophile.com/cables/1005nirvana

Consider:

"A complex array of wire guides locates the conductors and damps
vibrations; this assembly is wrapped in an insulating jacket of amorphous
PTFE (Teflon) and air, and then an outer sheath of a polyurethane-based
composite engineered to reduce static "buildup."

Gosh, real science solutions to widely described technical limitations of
wire from home depot. Now see the bridge to the subjective enterprise:

"The echoes trailing Sills's notes vividly described the space with a
consistency and clarity that made it seem real."

Look carefully at the science evoked above, vibrations and static
phenomena, which are at best even if existing, which we can't confirm the
marketer has demonstrated, are small scale phenomia. In turn is implied
and tied the cause in principle of large scale phenomena of timing and
phase effects which are known to lie at the root of space perception. To
affect them would require vibration and static charge levels on a huge
scale. Best not to question the advert copy one thinks.

wrote in message ...
One of the frequent tactics of the hifi mags is to evoke science in
support of opinions which then in turn are said to support the subjective
enterprise as legitimate because some scientific terms have been tossed
around here and there. One good example is the stereophile online
article:

'Nirvana Audio S-X Ltd. loudspeaker cable'

http://www.stereophile.com/cables/1005nirvana

Consider:

"A complex array of wire guides locates the conductors and damps
vibrations; this assembly is wrapped in an insulating jacket of amorphous
PTFE (Teflon) and air, and then an outer sheath of a polyurethane-based
composite engineered to reduce static "buildup."

Gosh, real science solutions to widely described technical limitations of
wire from home depot. Now see the bridge to the subjective enterprise:

"The echoes trailing Sills's notes vividly described the space with a
consistency and clarity that made it seem real."

Look carefully at the science evoked above, vibrations and static
phenomena, which are at best even if existing, which we can't confirm the
marketer has demonstrated, are small scale phenomia. In turn is implied
and tied the cause in principle of large scale phenomena of timing and
phase effects which are known to lie at the root of space perception. To
affect them would require vibration and static charge levels on a huge
scale. Best not to question the advert copy one thinks.

With all due respect (well, maybe not as much as you would like) I've just
read this article based on the link you provided, and *NOWHERE* did I see
the author ascribe any effect to any cause.

In the first part of the article, he describes the cable's construction as
described by the manufacturer. In the second part of the article he
describes what he hears without ascribing it to any "means" and mostly in
comparison to three other reference cables.

*YOU* are the one who is making the connection, not the author.

The magazine did *NOT* evoke science. The magazine simply reviewed the
cable. Part of any review is description; the other part is subjective
impression. A third part (absent in this case) might be objective
measurement. The author even did a pretty good job of describing the
construction without hyperbole. You simply responded badly, presumably
because you think cable differences are b_sh.. and shouldn't be reviewed at
all.

wrote in message ...
One of the frequent tactics of the hifi mags is to evoke science in
support of opinions which then in turn are said to support the subjective
enterprise as legitimate because some scientific terms have been tossed
around here and there. One good example is the stereophile online
article:

'Nirvana Audio S-X Ltd. loudspeaker cable'

http://www.stereophile.com/cables/1005nirvana

Consider:

"A complex array of wire guides locates the conductors and damps
vibrations; this assembly is wrapped in an insulating jacket of amorphous
PTFE (Teflon) and air, and then an outer sheath of a polyurethane-based
composite engineered to reduce static "buildup."

Gosh, real science solutions to widely described technical limitations of
wire from home depot. Now see the bridge to the subjective enterprise:

"The echoes trailing Sills's notes vividly described the space with a
consistency and clarity that made it seem real."

Look carefully at the science evoked above, vibrations and static
phenomena, which are at best even if existing, which we can't confirm the
marketer has demonstrated, are small scale phenomia. In turn is implied
and tied the cause in principle of large scale phenomena of timing and
phase effects which are known to lie at the root of space perception. To
affect them would require vibration and static charge levels on a huge
scale. Best not to question the advert copy one thinks.


As much as I know that wire is wire, this is not what Atkinson would call a
review, as was the case with the Shakti Stone piffle. It's an opinion
piece, without any measurements. That seems to be the way the define things
at SP. A review has measurements and the really lame stuff that obviously
is snake oil has none.

Anybody who believes that wire is going to be of any significance in their
audio system simply is unaware of how bad the previous wire would have to be
to make the new wire have any audible effect.

Either that or they just want to believe.

Wire that has been on for a very long time and caused resistance to build
because of oxidization, is a possible way wire change can cause an audible
improvement. the simple act of removing interconnects can often clean the
contacts enough to make the new sire sound different. It would not however
sound different when switching between the 2 except in the mind of the
listener.

Wire that is of a very small gauge being replaced by a more suitable one can
cause a difference that would be audible whenever you changed from one to
the other.

There may some other instance where a difference could be heard by changing
out interconnects or speaker cable but I can't remember what it might be.

Real men use Home Depot 12 AWG wire that sells for about 25 cents a foot and
Radio Shack interconnects when the ones that came with the equipment wear
out. :-)

wrote:
wrote in message ...
One of the frequent tactics of the hifi mags is to evoke science in
support of opinions which then in turn are said to support the subjective
enterprise as legitimate because some scientific terms have been tossed
around here and there. One good example is the stereophile online
article:

'Nirvana Audio S-X Ltd. loudspeaker cable'

http://www.stereophile.com/cables/1005nirvana

Consider:

"A complex array of wire guides locates the conductors and damps
vibrations; this assembly is wrapped in an insulating jacket of amorphous
PTFE (Teflon) and air, and then an outer sheath of a polyurethane-based
composite engineered to reduce static "buildup."

Gosh, real science solutions to widely described technical limitations of
wire from home depot. Now see the bridge to the subjective enterprise:

"The echoes trailing Sills's notes vividly described the space with a
consistency and clarity that made it seem real."

Look carefully at the science evoked above, vibrations and static
phenomena, which are at best even if existing, which we can't confirm the
marketer has demonstrated, are small scale phenomia. In turn is implied
and tied the cause in principle of large scale phenomena of timing and
phase effects which are known to lie at the root of space perception. To
affect them would require vibration and static charge levels on a huge
scale. Best not to question the advert copy one thinks.


As much as I know that wire is wire, this is not what Atkinson would call a
review, as was the case with the Shakti Stone piffle. It's an opinion
piece, without any measurements. That seems to be the way the define things
at SP. A review has measurements and the really lame stuff that obviously
is snake oil has none.


Well, sometimes it rates a blurb by Art Dudley saying, he doesn't know
how or why it works, but by gosh it sure does *something*! And maybe
an 'even my wife heard it!' from one of the editorial staff.



--
-S
"The most appealing intuitive argument for atheism is the mindblowing stupidity of religious
fundamentalists." -- Ginger Yellow

wrote in message
...

Consider:
As much as I know that wire is wire, this is not what Atkinson would call
a
review, as was the case with the Shakti Stone piffle. It's an opinion
piece, without any measurements. That seems to be the way the define
things
at SP. A review has measurements and the really lame stuff that obviously
is snake oil has none.

Measurements, shmeasurements. The Abso!ute Sound published photographs
demonstrating how playing digitally recorded vinyl produced cracks in
turntable rotors. It's not a "opinion piece", its another "HA HA piece".

"As much as I know that wire is wire, this is not what Atkinson would call
a review, as was the case with the Shakti Stone piffle. It's an opinion
piece, without any measurements. That seems to be the way the define
things at SP. A review has measurements and the really lame stuff that
obviously is snake oil has none."

It could be, but an alternative conclusion in the case of wire is that
measurement would show few if any differences which could be tied to
anything the wire marketer claims. It would show the usual rcl parameters
and easy to position this wire below the levels that mean anything in
signals. Instead of this silly copy a real service would be to attempt to
confirm "vibration and static charge" as being any different from the home
depot wire of a similar gauge. Instead we get literary hand waving and
know absolutely nothing at the end that is of any utility or service
except entertainment. How boring a straight line for frequency and
minimal differnces in any rcl parameter with frequency, who cares enough
to do the work.

"With all due respect (well, maybe not as much as you would like) I've
just read this article based on the link you provided, and *NOWHERE* did I
see the author ascribe any effect to any cause.

In the first part of the article, he describes the cable's construction as
described by the manufacturer. In the second part of the article he
describes what he hears without ascribing it to any "means" and mostly in
comparison to three other reference cables.

*YOU* are the one who is making the connection, not the author.

The magazine did *NOT* evoke science. The magazine simply reviewed the
cable. Part of any review is description; the other part is subjective
impression. A third part (absent in this case) might be objective
measurement. The author even did a pretty good job of describing the
construction without hyperbole. You simply responded badly, presumably
because you think cable differences are b_sh.. and shouldn't be reviewed
at all."

Then why use any copy space to describe wire and do it in such a way as to
infer claims of scientific principles at work. I only chose a small snip,
there were other implied wire factors appealing to science as being of
importance in the performance

Then in following order we hear reported subjective "results" as to
various sound effects, again only one example used among others listed.

This in my mind makes clear what message is being delivered, this wire
based on principles of science a b c d ... produces sound effects 1 2 3 4
.... and should presumably in anyone system given the validity of the
"science" causing the reported "sounds" built into this wire.

The advert copy folk know well enough this message, claims are due to
accepted science and we attach our product to that bandwagon by marketing
association. It looks as though the "review"author took the advert copy
and the implications directly from the marketer, with all due respect.