I've had it... so I'm editing all my posts in this thread.

I make a suggestion, which may or may not help some folks improve their 950's performance, and... boom, here comes the glass half empty, negative nebob folks with their criticism. Of course, none of them offer an alternative positive idea.
Once again, no good deed goes unpunished.

I'm done. I'm joining the thread farters. IT'S TIME for me to be a nasty Son of a Bitch too.

[This message has been edited by merc (edited June 30, 2002).]

Who is the cable supplier for NASA?

Is the space shuttle wired with Home Depot or Radio Shack materials?

I'm sure they know who makes the best cable, any NASA engineers here who could fill us in as to the owner of the contract for that baby.

LQQK

I've had it... so I'm editing all my posts in this thread.

I make a suggestion, which may or may not help some folks improve their 950's performance, and... boom, here comes the glass half empty, negative nebob folks with their criticism. Of course, none of them offer an alternative positive idea.
Once again, no good deed goes unpunished.

I'm done. I'm joining the thread farters. IT'S TIME for me to be a nasty Son of a Bitch too.

[This message has been edited by merc (edited June 30, 2002).]

The burden of proof falls on the one making the assertion.

For instance, if I state that I dislike mac & cheese and prefer not to eat it that is a statement of personal preference and not in need of proof. If, however, I state that mac & cheese is nasty and if anyone eats it they're likely to get sick I've exported my own personal response to the general case and I will almost certainly be challanged on it.

Similarly, when merc says he likes the sound of his 950 with Outlaw cables over other cables he is stating personal, internal preference. When someone says 'high end' cables are 'more transparent' to 'digital/analog signals' and contribute less distortion, they are making a statement asserting a personal belief as fact. The onus of proof is on the person making the statement.

Have a good one.

To avoid confusion, I have modified this post to reflect that the following comments were posted earlier by Merc. He has since chosen to delete his comments. This is not intended to be disrespectful to Merc...just to clarify what I was responding to.

Merc wrote:
"Of course, if you fully subscribe to a well constructed scientific trial, and of reaching a significant p value, then I'm sure that these folks did each test hundreds or thousands of times, right? And, that they tested every possible combination of every available source, preamp, amp, and speaker combination... oh damn, and then again, what they heard or didn't hear may have been affected by their speaker cables and power cables... oh dang, and how about the specific media they used? Did they also test each possible CD, vinyl, tape, etc??? So, if they didn't then their results are ONLY valid for those specific pieces of gear they did use, as long as they did enough repetitions in order to reach significance. Oh yeah, finally, their testing WAS Double Blind as well, correct?
Why can't each person listen to their own gear and each person make their own personal decision?
Remember... perception IS reality.”

Hi Merc,

I had this same perspective through most of the 1980’s lingering into the 90’s until I participated in several dozen controlled test using multiple systems and in varying locations… only to find I really never score higher than what could be considered a random outcome. I did not try every possible combination in the world but felt that it was a good representation.

At first, after repeated failings on my part, I believed that the test were not conducive to showing the difference…differences I KNEW existed, and I set out to prove the “engineers” wrong.

Always the tests were simple double blind setups. I was allowed all the time I wanted before I registered my final input. The test were conducted by and with several audio designers and manufacturers who then, and now, believe that a properly designed cable, with stable electronics, will not have a sound of their own. This is not to say that you can’t have poor designs (LCR issues) and/or electrical (impedance) mis-matches that will cause measurable and audible differences. But I assume we all are discussing properly setup systems.

After a few years of being one of the “Audiophiles”, side by side with the audio engineers who conducted these test, I finally started to accept that what I had perceived was not repeatable when my sighted knowledge of the cables was removed. It humbled me and made me ponder what were the reasons why I was so sure I had heard all those differences through the years. My conclusion…speaking for myself only…simply is poor or no control over the evaluation procedures and environment. Also once you believe and buy into these perceived differences it’s very hard to control the emotions and ego that can develop with those beliefs and then admit that you may have been mistaken.

“Remember... perception IS reality”

I can’t argue this point. There are those who will call Miss Cleo to find out what’s in store for them…some who believe that Pro Wrestling is real…or swear that a car goes faster after being washed (I still fall into this camp) .

Those who wish to play with cables are fine by me.

I’ve been there, done that. Have Fun!!!

Best regards,
Tom Garcia


[This message has been edited by TJG (edited June 29, 2002).]

[This message has been edited by TJG (edited June 29, 2002).]

[This message has been edited by TJG (edited June 30, 2002).]

[This message has been edited by TJG (edited June 30, 2002).]

"I'm not sure about vs. competitors, but Harmon Intl. uses ABX extensively in R&D."

Hi Charlie,

You're correct about Harmon Intl...and they often do use competitors equipment and conduct their test blind using various review panels. Dr. Flold Toole and Sean Olive oversee much of the testing. I have had extensive conversations with them as well as other Harmon engineers and designers on this exact topic.

Best regards,
Tom Garcia

Hi Merc, (No, I'm not picking on you!)
Actually, the testing performed was done as objectively as possible while observing realistic time constraints and a results-oriented process. But enough of that.
My perception is this: Y'all are a good bunch of people with whom I enjoy conversing. I can always expect good debate with a fair amount of intelligence thrown in for good measure. Thank God we don't all agree on everything! Wouldn't that be boring? I'll continue to throw my two cents worth in and hopefully I will have something of value to contribute once in a while.
With all of the seriousness that I can muster on a Saturday evening, I think that the Outlaw interconnects represent a good value.
I hope that everyone is enjoying their weekend.
Until next time,
Mix

Tom,
This one's for you.(again). I just got around to reading your post. Don't know how I missed it. At the close of another lengthy debate in this forum I lauded you for stepping-in with a well-worded, relevent, and on-the-money response. You are two-for-two. Nicely done.
Mix

Merc,

to a high degree i agree with you. But to add to the confusion consider which cables are being run if you are using the analog passthrough or even the analog input on the 950.

I still found the 950 a little edgy on the top end while using the Outlaw interconnects for music playback. After i added a cd player with a smooth, layed back sound quality and used some other good analog interconnects to feed the 950 the sound now became beautifully detailed with no sign of harshness. (the cd player is an Arcam 8SE and interconnects are the Acoustic Research Master series)

I heard exactly what Merc described on the Outlaw cables vs my old straight wire (brand) cables. A marginal taming of the highs, opening of the mids, and better bass extention (though no noticeable warmth added). But the improvements were very subtle, and I have no doubt that Merc was being facetious in the 950 having anything even approaching the warmth and smoothness of the Rotel. (or for that matter the somewhat less detailed and precise Rotel sound).

The effect is there but way to subtle to mistaken for even mild EQ adustments - unless maybe you're moving from lower end AudiQuests or something equally awful.

And by the way anyone that can't hear differences from the top to the bottom lines of interconnects after careful listening shouldn't be wasting their money on seperates. The Bose comes in a nice all in one package with those cute little speakers..