If you buy these solely because you think they will make a big difference in your sound, you are mistaken. They will tidy up cable runs and help keep power cables from laying on top of your speaker cables even if you do cross them at a 90 degree angle. Can they make the sound worse while keeping your cables more tidy? No, I don't think that is possible. Are there possible sonic benefits to getting your cables off the floor and away from power cables? You need to decide that. Like I said, it might be a skosh cleaner.
Cable Elevators
- Thread starter mep
- Start date
If you buy these solely because you think they will make a big difference in your sound, you are mistaken. They will tidy up cable runs and help keep power cables from laying on top of your speaker cables even if you do cross them at a 90 degree angle. Can they make the sound worse while keeping your cables more tidy? No, I don't think that is possible. Are there possible sonic benefits to getting your cables off the floor and away from power cables? You need to decide that. Like I said, it might be a skosh cleaner.
Heya Mep,
I was just showing a clear example with Steve being frank and his experience on something I have mentioned a few times.
This is not expectation bias nor linked to placebo effect, unfortunately some vocal posters on other forums (think you can work out the ones) do not differentiate between these and tell everyone they are suffering placebo effect; and that is wrong as the mechanisms are different.
Coming back to my post and Steve's experience, it is in our nature mep; we cannot help that changing something causes us to model possibilities and weigh-process certain variables-factors for us to concentrate on, you do not need to think of it in advance it happens also in real-time.
But as I mention like biases an approach-framework can overcome this.
The more subtle the change the more we sometimes overweigh-emphasise one of those variables-factors we judge (now I am not saying this is happening to you with the elevators, but it is something that affects us all and usually requires a certain approach-methodology-mindset to overcome and worth keeping in mind).
Hopefully my post did not come across with me being critical, I am more laid back on this subject than some (due to my feelings critically on the implementation of the DBT and how they can in many instances be flawed or results overemphasised, especially as proposed by some in audio circles) but we all definitely need to be aware of such cognitive behaviour I just mentioned, along with of course expectation-perception related biases.
Cheers
Orb
Last edited:
Orb-I appreciate your thoughtful response. I think I have done a pretty good job of playing down expectations for what you can expect cable elevators to do for your system. I'm certainly not on record ranting and raving about how much they increased the sound quality of my system. I try and never assume that just because I bought something new for my stereo that my sound quality is going to increase. Obviously you hope that it does, but hope all too often fails to meet reality. Basically, $240 bought me some housekeeping for my cable management and I'm fine with that.
Now what I did tell people about in another thread several weeks ago is how spending $59 definitely brought an improvement to my system far beyond what you would ever expect $59 to bring to the table. Too bad that those in need of some sound treatment in their rooms probably can't get away with using them without their wives cutting off their onions and putting them in a jar by the door next to Eleanor Rigby's face.
Now what I did tell people about in another thread several weeks ago is how spending $59 definitely brought an improvement to my system far beyond what you would ever expect $59 to bring to the table. Too bad that those in need of some sound treatment in their rooms probably can't get away with using them without their wives cutting off their onions and putting them in a jar by the door next to Eleanor Rigby's face.
I've mentioned how I make DIY power accessories: cords, extensions, custom 4-Plexs. In essence, I see raw wire that I like, or a design that looks interesting, and build some cords (or whatever) of my own. Something like this happened a couple of weeks ago, when I saw a design that looked kinda cool. Within a few hours, I had a cord of my own. No expectations, aside from cosmetics. To make a long story short, the effect was noticeable to the degree of having to move the speakers. The sonic difference was that pronounced. Remember, it's a power cord. The question then becomes, what did I actually hear?
Have a quick listen to JJ's comments. Highly enlightening.
Shaffer,
more interesting is when JJ is in debates with someone with a classicial science degree-research lab background and who also heavily in audio such as John Atkinson (most do not appreciate there are several in audio publications who are from a true heavy scientific education background backed up with a research-science lab post combined with extensive audio knowledge and experience).
It is less one-sided view (JJ says a lot that is incredibly useful but sometimes at the expense of some other considerations) and I feel more balanced, especially when they discuss testing methodology, whether perception comparison tests or measurements.
Cheers
Orb
more interesting is when JJ is in debates with someone with a classicial science degree-research lab background and who also heavily in audio such as John Atkinson (most do not appreciate there are several in audio publications who are from a true heavy scientific education background backed up with a research-science lab post combined with extensive audio knowledge and experience).
It is less one-sided view (JJ says a lot that is incredibly useful but sometimes at the expense of some other considerations) and I feel more balanced, especially when they discuss testing methodology, whether perception comparison tests or measurements.
Cheers
Orb
There's nothing to debate regarding JJ's research. It is what it is. As for his own views, who cares?
Edit: On a personal note, there was a time before forums like this ever come into fruition, when some posted on Usenet. JJ, JA, etc, etc, (including myself) were all there debating this ad nauseum. We had threads that went on for years. Yes, years. The saying, "been there, done that," seems to apply. You're free, of course, to debate whatever you like. I only ask that you remember that not all of us just fell off the turnip truck.
BTW, please don't hesitate to refer to me by my name, Felix. Shaffer was something I got from a stack of CDs on my desk, as I didn't want to utilize my previously known moniker.
Last edited:
We hear what we want to.
Edit: From the POV of our pursuit, how do we overcome this effect? I'll say right now that I don't have the answer. On a personal level, I prefer to evaluate a given upgrade long term, as its level of apparent "goodness," if you will, seems to transcend the audio-drug effects and allows one to notice the smaller details in the presentation that become overshadowed by (my) initial level of personal bias. This is my own hobbyist perspective, as I select gear for playing music in my home, and I want equipment that will allow for a certain level of enjoyment over time. Reviewing gear? Not for me to say; have zero experience with this. Evaluating audio equipment in hopes of finding the trVth? Just don't care.
Last edited:
In the context of listening for a specific instrument, I get that. When you are just listening to music for the pleasure of listening to music, I don't think you should hear something different every time you sit down in front of your system unless that is your intent.
Bingo. That's why I use them, to dress the cables so that power cables aren't near low level signal cables. I can't believe how many responses you got to a relatively new thread, this is as far as I got in reading it, but so far, you are the first person that mentioned this as a rationale. Now, I guess, by logical extension, you could say, 'well, what's the problem with having such cables touch," and the answer would probably be "potential noise" or "hum" which is a sonic attribute, but it's more of a prophylactic issue, at least for me- preventing a potential noise or hum problem rather than ameliorating one. In other words, I don't think it improved the sound even in this sense.
watch both his videos on sheilding to get the theory, speaker cables are basically unsheilded which is why it has a tendency to interact with its surroundings.
Geroge cardas on elevators, starts at 1:30
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=9uhobsHs-_o#!
Geroge cardas on elevators, starts at 1:30
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=9uhobsHs-_o#!
"speaker cables are basically unsheilded which is why it has a tendency to interact with its surroundings."
did read that part he's demonstrating the effect of an unsheilded cable (think speaker cable) when it interacts with its surrounding like placed on a surface. the sinewave on his scope when the cable was raised is the desireable one. the spuriae on the scope when the cable is placed on a surface is undesireable.
did read that part
he's demonstrating the effect of an unsheilded cable (think speaker cable) when it interacts with its surrounding like placed on a surface. the sinewave on his scope when the cable was raised is the desireable one. the spuriae on the scope when the cable is placed on a surface is undesireable.There's nothing to debate regarding JJ's research. It is what it is. As for his own views, who cares?
Edit: On a personal note, there was a time before forums like this ever come into fruition, when some posted on Usenet. JJ, JA, etc, etc, (including myself) were all there debating this ad nauseum. We had threads that went on for years. Yes, years. The saying, "been there, done that," seems to apply. You're free, of course, to debate whatever you like. I only ask that you remember that not all of us just fell off the turnip truck.
BTW, please don't hesitate to refer to me by my name, Felix. Shaffer was something I got from a stack of CDs on my desk, as I didn't want to utilize my previously known moniker.
Doh yeah sorry just noticed Felix at the bottom.
Oh I agree about JJ research, just often it broadens into areas of testing methodology and dbt perception, where if one follows research in other industries (beyond the traditional AV field hifi links to) involving bias methodology testing/jnd research it seems closer to JA presentations.
Like you I also have discussed this at length but on Stereophile with JJ and others and was a member of HA for quite awhile following debates there (although I have let that go like SP for awhile now).
Hopefully my posts do not come across in the way of the just fell off the turnip truck, just very difficult to walk a path that is considerate to all at times, so I appreciate I may come across stand-offish but that is not my intention.
I would say JA's knowledge is equal to JJ tbh and why personally such presentation by JJ and involving Ethan are better with his involvement, both JJ and JA have strengths and weaknesses due to their roles.
Same with Paul Miller and Keith Howard, where JJ will have weaker knowledge than them in certain areas of audio subject matter and will be stronger in others.
I have not seen one perfect person yet, wait yes... me of course
Cheers
Orb
Tom. I didn't realize you were so sensitive. This is a casual thread as dictated by Mark in the OP. Mark was teasing, you teased him, I teased you. I just figured if you could dish it out by making fun of audiophiles, which almost all of us here are, you could take it too. I've certainly teased mep and others way harder than that and vice versa. In any case, now I know. Sorry man, it won't happen again. Let me just call you on one little thing too, you've been using ad hominem swipes for a looooong time man. Perhaps I won't be teasing you again but that "button" you refer to might get used a lot more. That would be a shame since I do think you are a nice guy and probably fun too.
Similar threads
