Ethan: Paul, explain to me the objective benefits of your $1000 interconnects. Paul: Aahhh, good question. I remember hiking in the woods north of my house. No, wait... it was south. Well, really more south-west. It was a warm sunny day. I remember this because it was unusual for September. The birds were singing and the squirrels were foraging for nuts, you know... like they do. Any-who... PS cables are the best. Paul is a salesman, full stop. His "opinions" are heavily greased with the very snake oil he SELLS. Debating a salesman is akin to debating a politician. Obfuscation, non-answers, eluding the questions and, especially, clouding the issues with double speak and subject changes are stock & trade for both.
Who is talking about $1000 interconnects? How much did Ethan's test equipment cost? Should he had bought some cheap Chinese knock-offs since all test equipment is the same?
@@jimolson9671 Paul could sell a lump of coal labelled "Pre-Diamond". 99.9% of us ain't buyin' it but some poor sucker's wife is sporting coal on her finger and trying to convince her friends and family that it's superior to their shitty "current diamonds".
Back in the 90's, I used to work in a high-end HiFi shop, I was kind of a gopher and all-around doer of what needed to be done, dusting and keeping things clean, cleaning the bathroom, helping with setting up auditions, loading heavy gear, etc. One day this guy comes in, he was purchasing a very high-end CD transport and a DAC to go with it. Of course, there were listening auditions to make sure this was what he wanted. After a few songs, he said "it sounds good, but it's a bit flat sounding", this is over $10,000 (in 90's money) worth of gear we're talking about LOL. So, the sales weasel recommends an external clock source (another $3k) and has me do the setup. I connect the clock source to the DAC's word clock input and then we put on the same CD he was listening to before. About halfway through the first song, the customer says "WOW! the everything sounds so much more OPEN and the detail and sound stage are also improved, I'LL TAKE IT!". Cool, whatever, another sale! He even sprung another $250 for the high-quality BNC cable. As I was boxing everything up, I then noticed the DAC had a small switch on the back panel labeled "Clock Source" with "Internal" and "External" being the two options. I didn't have the heart to say anything, but that switch was set to "Internal" the whole time. I kept my mouth shut, switched it to "External", boxed everything up and sent the customer on his way. I never said anything for fear of losing my job, but it just goes to show how easily perception can be influenced.
Ha! That reminds of me of studio sessions where a vocalist or musician got a little too hands on while I was mixing. Most of them are professionals and know to ask instead of touch, but some kept asking for intangible corrections on their vocal or instrument. In the worst cases, I marked an EMPTY channel as "LEAD VOX" and told them, here's the EQ, here's the compressor, here's the level, here's the pan, go to town. Sculpt it, give it your own flavor. And they's spend hours tweaking it. At the end of the mix, they'd be like, bro, that vocal is really stellar now huh? Not knowing I dailed it in 6 hours ago and nothing had changed since. Yeah, bro, it's perfect, great job!
This debate would never happen for the same reason that audio reviewers never do blind listening tests. It would show that these reviewers couldn’t identify which cable lifted the veil, widened the soundstage, and paid their salary even if their life depended on it.
This test will solve nothing except how Paul and Ethan hear things. The real point is if YOU hear a difference. If it sounds better to you (not Paul or Ethan) than buy it, if you don’t hear a difference, why would you buy it?
What test?? The actual TEST was done in this video: th-cam.com/video/ZyWt3kANA3Q/w-d-xo.html This is just a debate about measurable, observable things. As someone pointed out, there is NOTHING to debate, here. Ethan already proved that WITH the null test. This I guess would just be entertainment. But I'm guessing that Paul fellow will decline.
I challenge Paul not on wires, but on all the bad advice and outright mis-truths he spreads with his videos. A lot of people want to know the truth, and much of what Paul says is simply not true.
The real difference between these cables and amplifiers is that Paul has to address (read sales) it to prospective customers and you have to address it at AES & university students.
The more educated I became in electronics and audio, the further it pushed me away from many in the high-end community. There is just too much magic and fantasy taking place of fact. They listen to audio jewellery, not music. The snobs dismiss those who measure as "tin ear meter readers" and claim to hear the unhearable. They make claims of cable that somehow gain (vs rolloff) is involved. They also violently dismiss null and abx/dbt testers as "Inconclusive, or polluting of the original signal." History is littered with the crushed egos of those that failed blind amplifier and cable comparisons. Dunlavy used to demo his flagship speakers with a fake cable swap out that totally fooled the cocksure audio snobs in attendance. They live in a world that is like religious fundamentalism in denial of science. They also lean heavily on higher price always = better sound. When it comes to being on the side of engineers or audio mystics (especially those who make products they tout) I choose the engineers perspective. Science FTW \o/
Wow, this totally nails it. Well said. And so true. I think one problem is people have a hard time admitting they were scammed, even just to themselves. So they dig in and defend their unfortunate purchases rather than face the truth. My Null Tester demo video linked above *proves beyond all doubt* that the wires I tested all pass audio the same. The video clearly shows what the device does and how it works, yet some people choose to remain willfully ignorant.
Ethan Winer it has to be rooted in “ Alpha audiophile” ego. They paid 30 grand for a couple of speaker cables and damn it... they WILL hear a difference, and it’s ALWAYS better to them, never just different. They cannot be contradicted by proof as it would give them permanent psychological damage or harm sales of those that advertise with them. They will never accept the magnitude of their delusions. They always caveat the results "Yeah but..." (One alpha insisted that double-blind testing generates more false/erroneous/biased results than standard auditions.) They cannot handle any mitigation to their Alpha golden ear/audio expert status. I've seen a knock-down drag-out fight at a hi-fi dealer in Virginia. Two 50-something guys flying out the door into the street. The argument? Measured vs magic speaker cables. The defenses are always the same. 1) They have a better ear. 2) They spent more 3) They know more 4) Tests don't matter (unless it favors their opinion) 5) You cant afford it, so you are just angry about that. These same alphas cannot pass a blind abx/DBT but they will be the first to tell you how your system sounds and quality therof without hearing it.
the audiophiles are audiofools...in many cases, more money than sense....of course, that is until AFTER they buy their Brilliant Pebbles...then is all seems to equal out!!! :)
If I were a manufacturer of preamplifiers and power amplifiers, I definitely would not be claiming that cables make a difference with my equipment since that implies some pretty serious design issues if small changes in the characteristics of the cable (probably capacitance) affect performance.
I had already done my own null tests with 5 cables from Monster, Mogami, Gepco, Reference and (tsc tsc) Spectraflex. A much more basic test, just taking the signal out of the D/A converter, through each one of the cables, and recording it again through the A/D converter. ALL OF THE CABLES nulled themselves. So, I don't waste my time anymore.
this is flawed... of course a nulltest doesnt show the difference because the difference is small .. a 1khz doesnt become a 1,1khz sinewave... tho i heared it myself and cables do matter, you can keep thinking the nulltest "shows it all" and keep fooling yourself
I have 2500$ speaker cable.. its connected to about 30 grand of audio.. I sometimes swap it for 10$ cable to see the differences.. they are minor. I wouldnt be able to blind test. But i could easily blind test xlr cables. Not speaker cables. The differences are so small it's not worth the money. I just keep them for the hell of it Lol
I have expensive cables that I found in a dumpster. They work great but don't sound one bit different from any other adequate cheapo cables I've used? What am I doing wrong? Did the dumpster somehow drain all the mojo out of the cables? ;)
I was okay with this video, until you decided to take an unnecessary cheap shot at Paul’s pronunciation of “timbre,” in what is apparently a sad little attempt to assert what you see as your intellectual superiority. Paul is always gracious and understanding in his videos. You, clearly, are not.
Paul has to be "gracious and understanding" as he is selling a myth that cannot withstand debate. Audio engineering is mathematical. Sound "is' or "is not." Same with pronunciation or mispronunciation of language. Paul is inaccurate regarding audio and English. He deserves to be hammered.
No, you haven't hear a difference you only think you did. My Null tester demo proves this. You really need to watch that video, it's linked in the description. The issue is the frailty of human hearing. You think you hear a difference between wires, but there is no difference. At least not with most wires. So this is the answer, and you and Paul will either have to accept it or be forever wrong. There's no other way to say it.
So I'm guessing Paul never took you up on your offer? I heard he also said he was going to make a video demonstrating the audible difference between cheap and expensive cables, but that never happened either. In his response to you, he also laughably claimed that EMI isn't electrical. Then what the heck does he think the E stands for!?
Then Ethan should have no problem taking it, right? I mean, I've seen a guy in a demo room, an engineer, once claiming there could be no audible - not to mention measurable - differences in cables, who then was struck by said difference, get up, yelled it was imposssible, and leave the room. Where does that get everybody?
I don't know, Ethan always comes across to me as being a little too cocky. I recall seeing a video of his home listening room and it appeared rather junky to me. There are musicians who are technically adept and then there are artists who inject emotion into their music. I'm not saying at all that I think $1K interconnects are necessary but rather than debate Paul, I would like to see Ethan have a conversation with Nelson Pass.
@@falconquest2068 Why? Because Nelson Pass has any type of superiority over the rest of people interested in high quality reproduced sound? Sorry. Nelson Pass is just an audio designer with a lot of non scientific prejudices, like too many others.
@@falconquest2068 Not cocky, but confident and with good reason. He simply knows what is to Paul a mystery. I know this because I too know what Ethan knows and Paul doesn't.
I have a hell of a lot of respect for his guy. It's high time we all stopped swallowing the bullshit of certain audio engineers who think they know everything, and my God, they're countless. The worst part is the people who are suckers, and stupid enough to actually believe that a $3,000 pair of audio cables make a difference. Etc. and Etc. and Etc.
Great video, you remind me when in 1985 Bob Carver took on Stereophile Magazine's challenge to duplicate the $6,000 Conrad Johnson Premier Four in 48 hrs without even knowing what he was trying to match (the Conrad was in a black box), which he did successfully and proved it in a null test to later market his cloned amp for $400. Genius !
You, Sir, are quite correct, in that every meaningful parameter of an amplifier, such as gain, total harmonic distortion and signal-to-noise ratio can easily be measured! As far as "timber" is concerned, this is a non-issue, as the ideal amplifier should have NO timber! Timber comes (or SHOULD come) from the sound source, not the amplifier! It's job is to faithfully reproduce the sound source: any variation from the input signal constitutes distortion, and can absolutely be measured!
Ethan Winer indicated in a reply to this same question early on from another commenter that Paul McGowan initially agreed to the debate, but subsequently changed his mind and backed out.
Yes, if the amplifiers measure the same on numbers they should sound differently because of - Circuit board, Capacitors, Resistors., Power supply (how clean it is. etc). Would you think all of these will make the "exit" amplifier sound different?
I liked Paul at first, but then I heard him say things that quickly changed my mind. If I remember correctly from one video, he says swapping power cords is a great place to start in improving the sound you get from your system. I have limited electrical background, but I'm fully in the camp that says equipment sounds the same if it measures the same. Maybe this will discredit me, but I have a set of studio monitors for my PC and another for my TV setup. I figure they're good enough for me if they're good enough for the people who mix and master.
Very well articulated points. I agree with all of your points, Ethan. I do, however, have one point I'd like to make in Paul's defense. He's right about one thing - sometimes you can hear a difference in two signals that perfectly null, though he's wrong about us not knowing why. Psychoacoustics is why - and no, it doesn't mean that he's hearing a difference simply because he wants to. The cochlea actually has efferent (signal-sending) nerve fibers coming from the brainstem, which are connected to various parts of the brain including the visual cortex. What that means is that the signals from the ear to to the brain are actually modified based on what we are seeing, thinking, and feeling. How many times have you turned a knob or pressed a button on an EQ or a compressor on a muted channel and heard a difference in the mix? I know you've done it - all engineers have. A similar thing happens when someone buys overpriced voodoo wires. They see the wires, they expect a difference, and they actually hear one. The only caveat is that the change is only audible to them because that change happened entirely within their own nervous system. So if we want to be scientific and logical about things, we have to acknowledge that we all hear things differently based on our own thoughts and assumptions. A methodical approach with null testing is, of course, the only way to reorient our ears and challenge ourselves when we think we hear a difference in such situations.
Yes, of course it's well known that people imagine hearing things that don't exist. But the purpose of the null tester is to prove that a $3 RCA wire sounds the same as a much more expensive wire with BS "directional arrows." So for whatever reason people think Wire A sounds "better" than Wire B, they'd save a lot of money if they understood the difference was imagined and not real. There's also this: ethanwiner.com/believe.html
But can you explain how they "sound different"? In treble content etc. or in volume? No response means you are imagining things. If you CAN actually answer I might believe you. But if you can't explain how it sounds "different" then obviously it just doesn't.
@@EthanWiner just because two wires measure the same and you don't hear a difference doesn't proof that others also don't hear a difference. Edit: instead of throwing claims at each other the whole thing could so easily be settled with a blind listening test
@LD Blake if the difference is just imaginary, then again a blind listening test will solve this. Also, what makes you so sure that not hearing a difference is not a trick by your brain as well, because you DON'T want to hear a difference?
@@Simon-dn9kv Yes, a blind test is fine, but even better is my Null Tester demo that *proves* all four wires I compared sound the same, with no chance that "others" might hear a difference: th-cam.com/video/ZyWt3kANA3Q/w-d-xo.html
@@EthanWiner The brain is able to notice differences which shouldn't make a difference, like lowering the noise floor from -180db to -200db, which Rob Watts did proof. Now I'm wondering, would your Null Test be able to detect said noise floor difference?
When I purchase interconnects , my criteria is a decent build quality and the appropriate length , this minimises the chance i will need to replace them in the future. But that's just me.
The cable snake oil is really annoying. I'm glad that more engineers are coming around and showing test results to show that there is no audible difference in many of the products that they are stating are better. So ridiculous to think people are willing to spend 7 thousand on a cable
@@periurban I fully agree. Although I have some pre-disposed opinions on the matter, these two GIANTS outweigh them in every way. As a seasoned P.Eng myself (Mech) I'd volunteer to provide transparent and well experienced moderation if they'd like.
It should be safe to say that without audio engineers like Ethan we would not have great recordings, and without audio product designers/sellers like Paul and his company we would not have great equipment to reproduce those recordings on. However, as a retired professional engineer myself I have to agree with Ethan on this, but Paul’s sometimes ethereal explanations of all things audio can be quite interesting too, so I keep watching.
Yes, but that has nothing to do with measuring fidelity. Imaging is a function of echoes and reverb, either embedded in the recorded source or from reflections in your room. There's nothing a power amp or wire etc can do to affect imaging.
@@EthanWiner Hello Ethan, very informative your videos. Thanks. Regarding "Imaging" I have seen the term "Soundstage" .... Is "Imaging" and "Soundstage" the same thing? I guess "Soundstage" is more related to the position of instruments? In many Beatles albums you can clearly hear guitars on one speaker and vocals on the other speaker... I guess thats "Soundstage" while I think "Imaging" is what you already mentioned a function of echoes and reverb? Im a bit confused but Im sure you are right about "Imaging". Thanks will continue wathching your videos it is so refreshing to find sense and honesty in all this audio world. Thanks a lot!
Paul also says that speaker wires can sound different depending on the direction they are run. I.e.: swap them end for end and see which way sounds best. His explanation being that the metallic crystal structure of the wire can have a effect. He goes on to state that certain "High end" cable manufacturers can draw "mono-crystal" wires that need to be installed in a defined direction. This is why some audio cables ha directional arrows printed on them. Yeah, right. When it comes to audiophile grade equipment of any kind, there's always going to be that guy with more money than brains. The one who freaks out because his speaker cables are "BACKWARDS!" These are the ones that fall for the snake oil salesmen who sells him $20 per foot gold plated wires when a plain old spool of lamp cord wire from the hardware store would do just fine. I design signal cables for scientific instruments in extreme environments. My electrical engineers are more worried about impedance, shielding, and tribological noise in bending cables and couldn't care less which direction its running. What they care about is whether it transmits an accurate signal after many years of abuse. The life of a speaker wire in an audiophile listening room is fairly sedate.
Right behind you Ethan ,time to dispell the myths and lies peddled by sellers of audio gear for their own gains. Science and fact will always overcome!!
Ethan at round 0:50 in this video you claim that your null tester proves beyond doubt that wires sound the same. This is a very foolish statement. Tell the good people watching what your null tester actually compares and what it does not compare please. because after all the bamboozlement of achievements you state at the begining of the video I cannot take you serious when you claim your null tester proves two wires sound the same.
@LD Blake Hey. I agree with all you have said. Ethan may be able to prove that two cables carry the same signal from point a in a system to point b without any losses or additives withing the limits of the equipment measuring. Having done that it is reasonable to say that it is hard to understand how an expensive cable may sound different than a cheap cable. BUT it most certainly does not prove beyond doubt that two cables sound the same. The Best instrument for measuring sound is the human ear. If people are willing to spend silly money on cables and interconnects then is probably because they can hear a difference. Because a difference in sound may not be measureable it does not prove a difference does not exist. Has anyone ever done a blind test to see if people can hear a difference in components of a system?
@LD Blake We most certainly are talking about Sound. as per my first post above Ethan claims that he has proven that the two wires sound the same, People buy expensive cables because they believe they sound different, We are most definitely talking about Sound. The question is can two different sets of speaker cables for example within a system contribute to different Sounds as heard by peoples ears. Ethan claims that by taking two cables and having a Null test result means its impossible to hear a difference. This is a stretch of logic. Only a test using people and their ears would tell you if they sound different. I myself have heard a difference in speaker cables. No doubt the null test would say its impossible, I say I can hear a difference. Its Proven end of story.
@@wickie2222 Have you performed a Blind test? One of them could be out of order... Playing with words asside, the way we reproduce sound is ( as for now ) with electric current alternating through a transducer ( speaker ) so the only way for a cable to sound different is by altering in some way the electrical signal passing through it. What Ethan measures is just that, with a resolution that exceeds what superman could perceive. I think the cables do really look different one being much more fancy and stylish than the other even that little directional arrow... so nice and cool ( of course useless since the current goes both ways ) . Stick to that and you won't have to fool yourself.
See and this is how it looks like when you're clueless...cables to do not carry music. It's electric signals which do not give two shits about riding a piece of copper strang or a gold strang...the signal remains identical in both cases. It's like these stupid guys that buy a 500usd hdmi cable vs a decent cheaper one. It's only 0 and 1 going through it ...lol
@@robertm.5816 mixing & mastering is one of those things that never gets the credit it deserves cos its the art of hiding flaws so ya never knew they were there, & never knew what went into making it right.
@@grandmasmalibu Fortunately, not many people are going to get suckered into buying $5000 power cords. If they can? Why worry about them? They will not see poverty as you seemed so concerned about. Look at Pangea power cords. Not very expensive and can make a nice difference. That is, if your system is transparent enough to find out.
@@genez429 Pangea, oh, so those are the ones that make a difference!!!! And of course, the all encompassing, IF your system , blah blah blah...if it's such a great improvement, it should be heard on anything. If ya play a CD on any stereo, and play the vinyl version of the same album, wanna bet the CD will sound cleaner, cleaner, snap, pop and no Fremeritis artifacts
@@genez429 Meaningless waffle. Power cables, I.e. an inexpensive properly rated simple 3 core mains cable will work just as well as an expensive one. That is a scientific fact and easily provable using modern test equipment.
One way to measure width is with a phase correlation meter. Mixing engineers use this to assess mono compatibility, to ensure that no elements will drop out when a stereo mix is reduced to mono. For example over AM radio or for music on hold. But generally, width and sound stage, or whatever you like to call it, is all about left-right channel differences. Mono music has no width at all, of course. A common technique in rock music is to have the rhythm guitar player play the same part twice. Then one track is panned hard left and the other hard right. Because these are different performances the two parts are never exactly in sync. And this creates a huge very wide sound. I've done similar using a rhythm guitar on one side and an electric piano on the other. Both are playing the same chords but, again, the differences create a very pleasing wide sound. In fact, this can be *too* wide, so it's common to pull the two parts in a little so they're not panned fully left and fully right.
I'll add that classical music is often recorded with two main microphones, then additional "spot" mics are placed close to softer instruments like the harp, or a soloist playing a concerto. But the main mics pick up different parts of the orchestra, and the natural reverb they capture is also different left and right. When mixing pop music we almost always use stereo reverb, and that can make even a single performer placed in the middle sound large and wide.
@@EthanWiner thank you for the answer. The reason i ask is because i have 2 amplifiers, one is cheap and the other one is a little more expensive. I can test it over and over, and know which has better depth and layering. If i use that correlation meter, will that show the difference in amps? Also is there an acceptable measure for depth and layering using the correlation meter?
Thinking about this further, width isn't something you'd usually measure directly, but you could. If you subtract the left and right channels, similar to how my Null Tester works, whatever remains is the difference amount. If the left and right channels are totally different, then the width is at maximum. So I guess this "measurement" would be expressed as a percentage of the sum of the left and right channels. This video explains my Null Tester in detail: th-cam.com/video/ZyWt3kANA3Q/w-d-xo.html
There's nothing an amplifier type circuit can do to affect the width or depth of music. Width and depth are related to left-right channel differences as I already mentioned, and also the strength and timing of reflections, both single echoes and reverb (which is just more and denser echoes). Assuming both of your amplifiers are working correctly, I'll bet you $100 that you would not be able to tell which one sounds "wider" in a proper blind test.
Not going to get in to the Paul vs Ethan part , but I ask a question. If everything is measurable ,then every manufacturer should be making a near perfect product ( that should sound roughly the same) especially with electronic products. Even with sub "audiophile" manufacturers, Denon, Onkyo, Pioneer etc etc ... etc. they should all be able to make a near perfect products because they have the measurements and electronic components for manufacturers are cheap.
Yes! And these days most audio devices do indeed sound the same. That is, most are clean enough to not color the sound audibly. So if they have no sound, then by definition they sound the same. Reports to the contrary are usually due to people not knowing how to do a listening test properly. I recently submitted an article about listening tests to a major audio magazine, but it's not out yet so I can't link to it here. Hopefully in another few weeks it will be in print, and then soon after online.
After one of PS Audio's $6K USD DACs was performance analysied, and found to be less than SOTA (a $99 USD barebones one outperforms it) despite its marketing to contrary, and the subsequent confidence game they tried to run as an explanation about that, I seriously doubt that Paul will take you up on the debate. He's well aware that anyone with even a basis understanding of technology will see the flaws in his arguments.
IMO Paul knows well the reality about cables, but selling a low-tech device (i.e. fancy looking cable) in an insane price is very profitable! :D The consumers believe in snake oil. More expensive placebo is always better! :)
Same with that chubby-faced buffoon from Audioquest. I'm SURE he knows he's lying to everyone, but those lies are buying him an enormous house, a luxury car, and all the fancy steak dinners he can cram into his stupid face 😂
Dear Ethan, I thought Amir at ASR was my favourite TH-camr, but I think you might've just beat him to the top spot 😂 Well...equal first place 😊 Today I've been responding to comments from some poor, deluded guy who thinks "audiophile grade" AC power fuses can improve the sound of a hifi system. It's exhausting! Also, a so-called "professional engineer" who thinks Neutrik XLR connectors are crap, and replacing them with fancy (expensive) ones will make a worthwhile audio quality gain. 🙄🥱 Anyway, thank God for people like you! Aside from all that, we all know EXACTLY why Paul McGowan, the "engineer" from Audioquest, and "Danny" whatever-his-name-is (GR Research) will never agree to a debate (or truly blind listening tests) with a REAL engineer. Maybe I should include the word HONEST, as well, since many of the hifi charlatans probably know damn well that many of their products are worthless, scam items.
"No culture in human history ever suffered because its people became too reasonable or too desirous of having evidence in defense of their core beliefs." - Sam Harris
The first half of that quote is one thing and the second another. "Desirous" of having evidence in relation to "core beliefs" is fine and dandy if those core beliefs are relatable to your own. Core beliefs could involve sacrificing a whole population because in the long run it will solve global warming and food shortages according to evidence on hand; but is it actually morally correct? People and cultures would indeed suffer. Sam is smart and probably meant well, but the quote is messy and probably missing context. I give it a 2 out of 10.
Oh no! Did you watch the Null Tester video? A good solid state amplifier will have distortion less than 0.01 percent, which equates to -80 dB. But even really good tube amps have trouble trying to beat 1 percent distortion over the audio range. So that would yield a very obvious residual difference.
Is there really a unit of measurement for the envelope of a transient? Just curious. I know we can analyze waveforms, but that really doesn't always tell us a whole lot for complex ones outside of amplitude and background noise.
@Ethan Winer Have you tested a 500 watt perfect-square waveform on the same appropriate inert and reactive (capacitive and inductive and combinations) load with your Null-Tester and achieved identical results?
Yes I believe that could be done with appropriate attenuators on his box. And the squash the resistive dummy load quandry, if you can find a speaker with 500w power handling, like a stage touring array, you could use a real speaker load (although probably not in the same room!) There you go! Next idea to discredit the null test? P.S. You do realize there is no such thing as a perfect square wave? Infinite rise time? Not in this universe!
@Andy Delle Of course there is no "perfect" in our universe. That's just a "nitpicky" statement as one would normally assume "as close to perfect" as possible in this flawed universe. I'll just assume you are Trolling as my question was addressed to Ethan and clearly not you.
@Andy Delle AND, my question was just that, a question. As you seem to be Trolling I guess you "Assume" this was something you can Troll about. FYI, I am interested in finding out if there is a difference and if so what was it and what Ethan's analysis might be either way.
@@1dir951 This is a public forum. If you want to ask Ethan a question personally, then use EMAIL. It is quite acceptable for others to answer questions publicly. If I took your legitimate question as sarcastic, I apologize. But it did seem to me like another poke to discredit the null test. And I am hardly a troll - ask Ethan that. I am just one of those here who have a personal issue with all the audiophool crap. People are certainly free to buy what ever they want including fashion statements. Hell that's a multi billion industry on its own. The difference is that Prada is not making claims that their purse makes your cell phone achieve better coverage. Yet the audio trinkets industry freely uses junk science to sell their snake oil! that should at least be disclosed.
You need to watch the Null Tester video linked in the video description above. If you watch the entire video you'll see that it *proves* there are no differences in the four wires compared. So Paul is wrong that not everything can be measured.
I have a pair of expensive grado headphones and I have a 50cm grado extension cable. Im convinced that if I plug the headphone jack into this extension cable and the cable is brand new so all contacts with the plug and socket are new but I find the headphones sound is not quite so clear with the added extension. Is this possible or is it placebo.
I’m subscribed to both channels. Even though I like Paul’s attitude of making everything clean, good looking and the best quality possible, I’m really repelled by his ambiguous answers on meta-physics questions with his personal belief in the end. This is why I think that a well structured dialogue between these two channels is a win-win.
Cool Audio Hacks Whatever... the claim is : you cannot measure sound... omg what does a Analogue to digital converter (ADC) do? what is the data that comes out from a ADC other then sound in the time domain? in other words sound pressure being measured and quantized 1 Giga times per second ( on a simple normal 1GSPS scope). unfortunnatly this discussion will never end ...there is an all industry being fed on ignorance. I think it would be better to assume this expensive gear is no more than pieces of art, not techicaly superior, but beautiflly crafted with art and good (expensive) taste. Does Mona Lisa reproduces its subject better than an ordinary modern camera would? course not but is not the reason why it is so valuable, right. its about art... So please be at least inteligent and play on your areas of comfort and expertise... don’t mix science with beliefs... I think every loudspeaker / amp dont need to cost more than 1k to reproduce more than what you are able to hear. You may put diamonds on it and it will be more expensive...Still read the same measurements... but it may sound better... placebo effect
"Hi, I'm Paul. I work at an audio manufacturing company and I rely on things I specifically *can't* measure to construct my products." That's a good resume stuffer.
So you get amps with identical (high end ) specs and they sound different. They do. Or the manufacturer's specs are lying. Feedback connected to loudspeaker terminals - how does the negative feedback of back EMF from the reactive electromagnetic speaker drivers affect things in the amp ? How does the amplifier react to load impedances which vary with output frequencies ? Amp specs just seem to be based on measuring sinewaves, squarewaves and the like across dummy loads which don't seem to take into account real world operating conditions at all. Why do valve amplifiers sound better in many people's opinion ? Why when more feedback is switched in do they sound less "alive" for want of a better term ? Can Null tests be performed on different amps and the same model of speaker loads ? Will tolerances on those speakers be tight enough to prove very much ?
You need to watch the Null Tester video linked in this video description above. If you watch the entire video you'll see that it *proves* there are no differences in the four wires compared. And those comparisons used music, not test tones. This is about wires, not amps. But you are wrong about amps measuring the same and sounding different. If they really do sound different, as proved by a blind listening test, then I assure you they won't measure the same. Of course you have to measure everything, not just 1 KHz at 1 watt into 8 ohms. As for "valve amplifiers sound better in many people's opinion" you are correct that some people like the slightly distorted sound of tube gear. That's not hi-fi, and it's not what I like! But it's outside the realm of fidelity, and what can be measured, because it's preference. So that's not related to my criticisms of Paul's claims.
Well amps came up in the discussion - So let me ask you - (this isn't a criticism of you or your knowledge or experience in any way at all) how come you get amplifiers with low IMD, ruler flat frequency responses, low damping factor, low output impedance - that definately do sound different ? I'm getting older now so my ears aren't what they were, but I have been interested in audio gear all my adult life and have really noticed this, and find the effect is real. It is said that the human ear can't detect less that 1% distortion so that can't be the reason. There is a school of though which believes negative feedback might be part of this. As for cables - I've found that provided the resistance, inductance and capacitance are low enough they are all the same, so there we agree! I also agree with your comments about measuring everything! I just wonder if we've all missed something! Thanks for the reply! :-) PS: I'm also familiar with some of the work of Bob Carver having read about it online, who claimed to able to design an amp to sound like another, far more expensive one, which was accepted by many people, so maybe you do have a point. But if so why was there a difference in the first place if they were all highly specced ? :-)
@@shaunhw Manufacturing specs are provided to you by the marketing department to sell gear, not to educate, or provide any technical data that would survive proper scrutiny. They typically aren't lying, but are always far too abridged to be of any practical use. You have to measure everything. Providing everything wouldn't help sales, and might hurt them as the customer's eyes glaze over at the data, much of which they can't interpret. AMPS: An Amp's job in reproduction is to take the signal of recorded material, and amplify it, with nothing added or take away, and to do this doesn't cost a premium. When this is done, all amps will sound the same if not over driven. However, as an amp designer you can add coloration to the sound. This coloration is always very subtle, and if any was added, it is nothing compared to different speaker models. This is why it's always a laugh when folks discuss component matching. Component manufactures live by this ignorance. If your speakers aren't over driving the amp in some way, namely power or resistance load, the change from amp to amp will be spit in the ocean compared to speaker to speaker; or just moving the same speaker an inch or two in room. What Bob Carver did 20 years ago can be done easily with DSP, so in essence, find an amp that measures transparently (a pro class D amp will usually suffice) and by using DSP with computer software you can have unlimited coloration potential that you can change and adjust at anytime.
@@shaunhw I'll just add that amps that truly measure the same will in fact sound the same. In fact, they can measure differently and sound the same. For example, nobody can hear the difference between 0.002 and 0.005 percent distortion, but test gear can easily measure that. Most people have no idea how to do a proper listening test, and they don't even realize how difficult it is. You'd think it's easy! But it's not.
@LD Blake One difficulty with adding a controlled amount of distortion to music is the level of the music constantly changes. So if the music peaks at 1 volt, and you calibrate the clipping to a 1 volt sine wave, at any given moment the distortion on the music will be less. That's probably why you couldn't hear it until it got up to 6%. In my Damn Lies video Mike Rivers did something similar, but he also applied crossover distortion which works at the lowest levels rather than clipping the peaks: th-cam.com/video/Zvireu2SGZM/w-d-xo.htmlm34s
I watch Paul the same way I watch Borat. It is a character that says outrageous stuff and some gullible people think it is reality. Love your keyboard.
mag 1981 I have an excellent system, in fact I have about 5 audiophile systems . Most of my components have been on a class A rated reviewers guide. I just look at Ethan's videos when I want to get a laugh at a "box wine person" who thinks he is saving money because his ripple gets you drunk for less money than a bottle of Veve Cliquot ( the buzz ain't the same) . I think most people who own crap sounding systems love Ethan because they think somehow their systems are as good as much more expensive ones. Ethan's advice is good for making her public address systems in the NYC subways, but not for sound enjoyment. And Ethan's association with with Tufts just shows he found a person with a greater level of ignorance there.
Impossible to measure. But Paul, how do you even construct something you cant quantify or measure? Its not electrical....you got that right. Its placebo. :)
Mr. Gowan addressed the question of "impossible to measure"in audio because there are not yet electrical tools that can duplicate how the human ears, inside a head, and then finally by the brain processes signals to create hearing.
I saw in interview on youtube with Edgar Villchur the founder of AR speakers and he said that when he did the live vs. recorded tests that gained AR worldwide recognition, he used zip chord to connect to the speakers. He pointed this out to prove that cables do not effect the sound quality at all. These tests that Vlilchur did helped put the AR 3's in the Smithsonian.
Years ago I owned a pair of AR-3a speakers, and they were fantastic. I'd still have them now except I gave them to my recording studio partner when he moved away.
@@EthanWiner I have my father's pair of AR-2a's that I had upgraded to 2ax. They still sound amazing. A testament to the build quality of that company back in their day.
@@EthanWiner I have a pair of AR-3a's Absolutely love them, I was wondering if many other people still had them they are still great after all these years!
I love audio, and home theater, but sadly most of it is a total carnival con. Paul's videos are exhibit A. I totally understand wanting nice stuff, but aside from the audio jewlery approach to audio gear, there's no benefit to the technology over most of the gear you find off the shelf at the local big box. Audio science is a very mature technology. Most of what you'll find today was known in the 70s, and little if anything has improved. What has improved if anything has more to do with implementation of domesticated reproduction, and not the implementation of the component engineering. There's no secret sauce that Paul has in his amps/dacs/pres etc.
I remember when stereo review did their double blind tests back in the 80's and no one could reliably pick 12guage speaker wire when compared to expensive cable. And they did another test where they couldn't reliably pick between the sound of a Pioneer receiver and a Mark Levinson Class A amp.
Funny , I'm running an entry level 2018 Pioneer VSX-522 receiver in my hi fi and I wouldn't trade it for ANYTHING, it's absolutely transparent, smooth as silk, perfect bass, perfect mids, perfect highs, perfect soundstage, perfect depth, non detectable noise or distortion, no glare, tizz, opaqueness, no listening fatigue, no coloration, . . it does EVERYTHING the ridiculously expensive pre amp/ power Amp setups do, and just as well. Now if I hit the lottery and could afford Wilson Audio speakers then of COURSE I'd partner them with a higher priced front end , probably Dan D'Agastino or Constellation or such. . . But would I be gaining anything in all those aforementioned parameters?. . .probably not, only sheer power to drive the bigger speakers and more electricity used to listen to the system. . . Pioneer receiver + Paradigm top end speakers = end game for many lucky listeners😎
It's simple - the resistance of a fucking speaker cable is meaningless in the chain and even if it don't matter because it is linear - so a piece more on the volume control would make it gone - idiots waste money for cables, smart people nail the money on walls for acoustics which is 50% of what you hear
Although I am pro objective measuring approaches, there are still things you can't really measure regarding the loudspeakers output. Imaging qualities within the created soundstage is not really measurable and that is one of the most important characteristics in my oppinion. I'd love to hear from a methodology that is somehow able to measure that. Please don't forget that as a good Engineer you should always be open minded about unknown anomalies occuring in a specific field that human kind hadn't been able to research or fully measure yet. I am actually doing hands on research with different braiding and twisting techniques with the same cheap speakercable model and I am not happy about what I found out until now, because I'm not able to prove any of my findings scientifically... having said that... of course paul is just trying to sell his stuff and ethan is just an oldshool engineer with a strict mindset. I think the truth is somewhere in the middle. Try things out for yourself and have fun doing that!
Two separate disciplines; Everything regarding the loudspeakers output can be measured, everything. Physics. However, once you include imaging/soundstage characteristics, the elements of psychological and physiological responses move the science into Psycho-acoustics.
@@FOH3663 No. There is just physics at work that no one has come up with a way to perfectly measure, for each component in a rig. While Psychoacoustics is obviously real, and a huge element, BUT it is also the crutch of engineers to lay the weight of everything they cant explain.
I never heard anyone explain what it is they hear which can't be measured. Soundwaves is what our ears pick up and soundwaves can also be measured. 🤷♂️
The standard answer from believers is "We don't know what we don't know." But that's not true with audio, which is very low-tech compared to computer motherboards, radar, FM radio transmitters, and so much more. Further, my Null Tester *proves* beyond all doubt there's no as-yet unknown property of audio: th-cam.com/video/ZyWt3kANA3Q/w-d-xo.html
@@EthanWiner Thank you for replying, will watch other videos of yours. One question, I have never been able to tell any difference between speaker cables or power cables or any sort of "purified/filtered" powerstrips. However, I feel like I can pick upp differences quite easily comparing the most basic interconnects and better ones. Would you agree?
All competent RCA wires sound the same, as proved by the Null Tester video I linked above. There are many reasons people believe they hear differences in wires, even when there is no difference. The correct way to tell if you really can hear a difference is a blind test. But it has to be done correctly, and you have to choose correctly at least five or six times in a row to avoid guessing by chance. Here's a basic overview of wires: www.soundonsound.com/people/sounding-wire This explains one reason the sound reaching your ears really can change, but not because the wires are actually different: ethanwiner.com/believe.html And this explains in great detail how to do a proper listening test: www.prosoundweb.com/discerning-differences-how-to-conduct-proper-useful-listening-tests/
Thank you @@EthanWiner I was unsure of whether or not interconnects were possibly differing from speaker cable but apparently not then. I have listened to recorded comparisons which definitely sounded different but then there must be other explanations like you have pointed out.
Notice I said "competent" RCA wires. Not all wires are competent, with some having so much extra capacitance they could lose high frequencies. Even more likely: RCA connections can become flaky over time. So just unplugging and re-inserting *the same* wires can sometimes change the sound and make it clearer.
How interesting! I have been listening to Paul for some time now, and I am very interested to hear your perspectives Ethan. I work in spectral (visible and non-visible) imaging, specifically in collection and analysis for agricultural research. In every case, the limitations of my sensor determine what I can measure, and in every case there is always far more there than what I can collect across a number of dimensions (spectral, time, spatial). The concept of measuring truly Everything seems nearly impossible, as no real measuring device has or claims to have zero error; I can see the debate having a hard time concluding what is good enough for an audio experience. Statisticians spend their entire careers dealing these exact issues.
You need to watch the Null Tester video linked in the video description above. If you watch the entire video you'll see that it *proves* there are no differences in the four wires compared. So Paul is wrong that not everything can be measured.
I agree Zero Defects. We simply don’t have the means as of this moment to measure everything when it comes to sound and how we perceive sound. We simply don’t know how certain circuitry and wire make ups can affect how we perceive the sound.
@@EthanWiner I finally had the opportunity to sit down and watch the video, and it is a fantastic device and experiment. I really enjoy how the device is able to detect such tiny differences (e.g. heat) as you demonstrate it in use. I was only skeptical of the additional filtering to "remove ultrasonic error from the device" without more explanation (but you mention you will improve it in production). I am also a little confused about the "Null Dial" and how that needs to be adjusted to "find a null" and we are left to wonder what this setting means to your results, furthering this concern, I wonder how often it must be adjusted during an experiment. It seems as if these are countermeasures that are only in place to generate a more silent null output result. I believe that your results are very informative. I feel as if this device is an excellent B.S. detector, and its ability to give a real time demonstration can be powerful. There are some questions about the device that I imagine would be answered in a more detailed article.
@@Adriana21709 Sorry but you are wrong. Everything audible can be measured. Not only measured, but measured to a resolution much finer than anyone's ears. Even basic test gear can measure noise and distortion 20-30 dB softer than anyone can hear. You claimed, "We simply don’t have the means as of this moment to measure everything when it comes to sound and how we perceive sound." That sounds like you have actual experience with this, but you obviously don't. Though to be clear, all I address is audio equipment, not how people perceive sound. That falls under psychoacoustics, and it too can be known. But that's not what this is about.
@@zerodefcts watch the video again and you'll see that I show both a block diagram of the tester with its Null dial, and also the schematic which is simple enough to follow.
LOL, I bought a Northgate PC in the late 1980s, and I still use its keyboard. It's a great keyboard! I can work the F-keys on the left without looking, and nobody sells such a keyboard anymore. The keyboard outputs 5-pin DIN, so I have a DIN to PS/2 adapter, and then a PS/2 to USB adapter. It actually works.
What exactly are you trying to prove? If you don’t think there is a difference then just buy the cheapest product that will get the job done. However if I want to drop big $$$ because I think I can hear a difference what business is it of yours? I tend to agree with Paul in the regard that we only think we can measure everything that has an effect on the sound. People in the Middle Ages were absolutely positive that the world was flat. Bottom line is that whatever you are absolutely sure of is probably wrong. Having said that I doubt that I would be able to tell the difference between two high quality amps and I am sure that I cannot hear a meaningful difference in cheap vs expensive speaker cables. So for me I keep the purchases reasonable but if someone wants to drop $10K on speaker cables I don’t care.
You need to watch the Null Tester video linked in the video description above. If you watch the entire video you'll see that it *proves* there are no differences in the four wires compared. So Paul is wrong that not everything can be measured.
Thank you Ethan. I did watch your Null Tester video. Congratulations you did a very nice job on that piece of test equipment. I personally have never been able to tell any difference between cables but historically many times man ( or women) has been absolutely sure that they know the truth they have been wrong. I’m just saying that I do not rule out possibilities because I don’t believe them. I think you have to look at the entire chain from the source all the way to the speakers to truly understand audio reproduction. All of the links in the chain are affected by there connections to the other chains. Having said all of that, I do agree that expensive cables are “bullshit” and I would not spend my money on them. There are many other links in the chain that make a much larger impact. I find your videos entertaining and will probably watch some more of them.
@@JHuffPhoto While I mostly use cheap cables or make my own, there are places where a high-quality cable is desirable, like the cable you use to hook up a phonograph, or even speaker wire needs attention when used with a tube amp or other with a poor damping factor.
Hill's Workbench I totally agree with you and in his video about his Null Tester Ethan points this out. I would always recommend using a high quality cable but I personally do not buy cables that have been sprinkled with magic fairy dust and the price increased accordingly.
@@JHuffPhoto said, "I’m just saying that I do not rule out possibilities" My Null Tester demo aims to prove only that the four wires I tested are all identical. And it does prove that. There are no other possible possibilities. :->)
Hi Ethan, I was just wondering if I could get your opinion on something. I got into audio a few years back when I bought an entry level AV receiver and a pair of bookshelf speakers. I've since upgraded the speakers and will be upgrading again in the near future. I wondered about upgrading my amplifier when I upgrade the speakers so I searched Google for "AV receiver vs stereo amp". It seems I stumbled across the worlds largest can of worms because some people were claiming the difference is night and day while others were saying all amps sound the same. I researched the topic some more and came across various blind studies one of which involved an affordable stereo amp, source and cables being compared against a top of the line stereo amp, source and cables (unfortunately I couldn't find a blind comparison of a multi channel AV receiver vs a stereo amp). It seems this study is often sited in arguments on forums. The basic idea is that any competently designed amplifier when run within its limits (not close to or actually clipping) is indistinguishable from another regardless of price (or exotic cables etc). Do you subscribe to this belief and what would you consider a "competent" amplifier. Basically, if I could go with an AV receiver, it would make my life a whole lot simpler as I have numerous devices, some of which use HDMI. However, the speakers I want to buy are a big step up in terms of quality and I don't want them to be held back by an amplifier that doesn't do them justice. It's difficult to find objective tests of AV amps and hi-fi amps as the vast majority of reviews are entirely subjective in nature and carried out by the same people that believe cables make a difference in sound quality.
Yes, most modern audio electronic devices are clean enough to be "transparent," so by definition they all sound the same. Of course, power amps vary by how much power they can output. So a 25 watt amp driven into distortion won't sound the same as a 300 watt amp that remains undistorted. In the larger picture, the best way to assess audio products is by their published specs rather than listening which is fraught with problems. This video explains all about how audio fidelity is defined and measured: th-cam.com/video/Zvireu2SGZM/w-d-xo.html
There's also a huge amount of information about this large topic on my web site Articles page. Not just how audio works and is measured, but several articles explaining *why* people believe they hear differences that don't really exist: ethanwiner.com/articles.html
I agree with Paul. If measuring "what's best" was possible it would be a very simple job for reviewers to compare amplifiers and to say what's best. But there's not.
Why do you think it's impossible to measure what's best? Do you not understand how fidelity is defined? There are four parameters that define audio fidelity: Frequency response, noise, distortion, and time-based errors. Most of these have sub-categories, such as hum and buzz under Noise, and THD and IMD under Distortion. All of these can be measured and assessed.
While I like Paul's videos, I think you're right, he does indeed believe in a lot of "voodoo" and questionable opinions. I would certainly like this public debate to happen, it would be very interesting to see whether it can change Paul's opinion and maybe even lead to changes in how PS Audio designs their products.
"Believe" is perhaps giving him too much benefit of doubt since he is in the business of selling wire. You don't have to have any faith or belief in what you sell to make money, just convince others to buy it.
If amplifiers sound different, that literally means different pressure waves were created, thus scientifically measurable. If not measurable, you got placebo'd.
just a question,has anyone done a comparison test on TH-cam with say $5000 RCA cables on say a highend Mac to see if there is a difference in sound quality?
The real issue is that Paul knows he can't possibly prevail in a discussion with me about audio fidelity and related issues. He knows that half the stuff he says is nonsense that's easily refuted.
@@EthanWiner Hi Ethan, thanks for actually replying to my comments, it means a lot, I'm a big fan of yours :) Yes, this is what I meant with "that's a very nice way of putting it". In the strict sense he's not a chicken. I think "Charlatan" or "Quack" would be a more fitting way to describe his position. For me this kind of attitude fits well with the people, as described by you in the "Audio Myths" workshop, who camp at the big audio fairs and sell magic stones to attach to your mixer outputs. This being said, I often feel isolated in audio land by my scientific approach. After 20 years of professional experience, I'm strongly getting the impression that audio people are not supposed to handle jobs by being true to the substance, as to a certain level are directors or cinematographers for example. Some clients keep persisting on results based on their current mood or brainfart, without any regard for a professional approach. In other words, if one stays too true, one loses clients in case one deals with them too directly (in contrast to having a middle man who translates the vague crap people come up with). In other words, on some occasions it might be bad for business to contradict Paul’s ideas. I’m not trying to redeem Paul here in any way, but audio land is a weird place. I happen to also do a lot of programming, and here things are completely different. Hence the contrast might be extremely stark to me personally. For example: let’s say I have a problem with my Yamaha o2r, and I try to find a solution on the internet. I tend to get a lot of contradictory results, and I get the strong impression that the people who actually have the answer just sit on it, sometimes mainly to retain their dominance of the knowledge structure. As was the case with the whole apprenticeship thing back in the days in Europe. If I search for a programming related question, even if it’s based on certain hardware or operating system types, I get tons of right answers, which are structured in a way so as to make it extremely easy for me to define which one fits my problem best. The contrast is jaw-dropping to say the least. So, to make a long story short: I personally feel Paul is way out of line, but to the industry he’s probably, unfortunately, spot on in the middle of things.
@@genez429 This is the problem. Paul McGowan use his name to spread his bullshit... Maybe he is a good engineer with a lot experience , but I don't have respect for those who have ignorant in other field and don't see this.
You could at least entice everyone by promising a nice panel of judges with physics PHD's and plenty of wine and cheese flavored popcorn for the audience.
hello Ethan winer from Australia i don't know if you can answer this question is any danger leave preamp and power amp on standby 24/7 or is better to put audio of when finish listen to music what is best thank you
@LD Blake I turn on my computer and audio gear around 10:00 am when I start my day. Not all my audio gear, just the stuff I need to play music and sound from TH-cam videos etc. If I'll be doing music work that day I turn on my big rig once when I start, then off when I'm all done. At the end of the day I turn it all off, around 5:00 or so. When we watch TV In the evening over dinner and then after dinner, I power up everything - a receiver, active speakers, active sub, and either a TV set (while eating) or big screen projector (after dinner with the lights down). Then I turn it all off when we go to bed. I think most people are like this, as opposed to turn on the computer, work for ten minutes, turn it off, then back on again half an hour later. Yes, that's not good. If I have to go out for a few hours but plan to come back to work, I turn off the LCD computer monitor but leave the PC running. My comment was mostly to address the belief that electronics should be left on 24/7. A lot of people believe that! I disagree, and I've been doing it my way for about 55 years with no problems or early failure.
Is Paul saying that something beyond frequency, amplitude and phase describes a sound wave that we are unaware of? Or is he saying that we don't have test instruments that are fully capable of measuring frequency, amplitude and phase to levels required when doing signal analysis work on audio electronics?
@LD Blake yep you are preaching to the choir here. Signal analysis on the voltages we send to our speakers is a basic and fundamental process for those of us who are in the field.
when i first found PS audio's youtube channel i thought oh gee great. but when he started saying that you can get better CD quality by drawing around the rim with black pen - i realized hes full of shit. he also shot down the idea of mixing in a anechoic chamber because 'monitors are designed to be in a room'. the guys a one man misinformation army.
I would love to see/hear that debate. I often talk-up acoustical treatments on videos such as those posted by Paul and other "audioholics" and "audiophile" channels. They don't seem to want to deal with acoustical treatment much at all. I get the impression that acoustical treatment is considered an annoyance, at best, by companies who profit more from selling "audio magic" with active components rather than passive "audio magic" which rarely breaks or becomes obsolete. Be careful, audio fans. Acoustical treatment has made my living room/theater/home studio sound so good, I never want to leave.
RB so true and well said. For my listening room, no amount of magic products or electronic upgrades came close to what proper acoustical treatment has done.
Everybody already knows acoustic treatment, speaker positioning, listening position etc, is essential in getting the best listening experience. McGowen often talks about this... however, I've never heard him mention "audio magic". Electronics, cables, speakers, room treatments.... it ALL makes a difference!
@@cranestance8316 - Yet few people understand that acoustics play the biggest roll in what the listener hears. I'm speaking about home use in rooms which are roughly "living room" size, home theater, home recording studio, etc.
@@cranestance8316 - Most audio sales people don't specifically mention "audio magic" but it is heavily implied. How many audio sales people ever mention "acoustic treatment" to their customers?
RB I agree 100%! I bought a lot of bass traps my current traps etc. from Ethan. Made a world of difference in my listening experience! This is far more important to me than any kind of cable measurement!
It's about time someone challenged the well meaning nonsense being circulated by people like Paul. Paul is immensely likeable and quite obviously genuine in his beliefs. It's a great pity for us that he's so deluded and that they are so demonstrably wrong, because they are costing the consumer unnecessary money. In one of Paul's more ludicrous videos he asserted that adding a valve pre-amplifier into the listening chain somehow 'improved' fidelity. It was utter nonsense and threw into question Paul's definition of just what his mystical 'fidelity' is. I have an idea. Added distortion byproducts equals increased fidelity in Paul's world. The euphonious sounding mid range of valve amplifiers has to do with the fact that unlike transistor amplification valve amplification distortion byproducts are harmonically related to the signal causing that distortion, thus enriching (and by the way distorting) the original timbre. To Paul who clearly believes in hi-fi fairies this is mystically increased 'fidelity', to anyone with half a brain, it's nice sounding added distortion. Given a choice between Ethan Winer and Paul McGowan if sense is the criteria I know who I'd choose.
Good one Gene. Right, there's no such thing as synergy in an audio system. The goal of high fidelity is equipment that's faithful to the source. Most modern gear is good enough to be audibly transparent. In other words, it has no sound of its own. The notion that one device can compensate for the flaws in another, or even augment such flaws, is misguided. That's just not how audio fidelity works.
Amir who recently showed their powerplants don't work, even add distortion. Which was followed by a small campaign to smear his name, by Paul. Seems the illusion is slowly fading as technology just shows the facts. Paul is an excellent salesman, but unfortunately he seems to try and pull a fast one on selling unneeded products.
@@thepogue Not in a million Sundays. Paul is as wrong as can be. Ethan Winer is a giant in knowledge compared to him. it's been proven many times that if you expect to hear a difference, you will. The mind is a strange thing like that. I'll give you this though, Paul sincerely believes the mystical mumbo jumbo he sprouts and he's a genuinely nice, decent man. Pity that his deluded nonsense costs so many people wanting their minds made up for them so much unnecessary money though.
So i replace speaker cable, my girlfriend comes home and asks why is sound different. Or, i take old tube amp with high measurable distortion and not so linear response, and it sounds much much better than the new class d amp, which measures almost perfect compared to tube amp. Trust your ears, only that counts.
@LD Blake sure, not once cable/amp that was great for me sounded really bad on some other system. Thats the whole beauty of searching for your hifi, otherwise you could just get something of the shelf (if we could precisely measure)
@LD Blake why there's no measurements like stage depth, width, imaging, warmth, timbar accuracy, etc, done by any company or institute? My 20+years experience of listening and buying hifi says that there's no measurements for most of things why we buy hifi
@@hudo "So i replace speaker cable, my girlfriend comes home and asks why is sound different". Have you heard about bad contacts? "Or, i take old tube amp with high measurable distortion and not so linear response, and it sounds much much better than the new class d amp, which measures almost perfect compared to tube amp" You have ansered your 'question'. Maybe your speaker's bad response was compensated by the tube amp. Everything in the signal chain have to be measured otherwise the test is invalid.
How much would you offer as a prize if someone could positively identify one specific set of interconnects consistently throughout a blind test that rotates through several different brands?
@@EthanWiner Somehow I don't think that James Randi would allow the correct identification of interconnects as part of his psychic challenge. I used to be able to identify different interconnects with pretty good accuracy, but my hearing isn't what it used to be, but I do know someone that can absolutely pick interconnects out with much better than 50/50 odds. Where are you located? If Paul McGowan doesn't accept your offer, maybe the guy I know will. And concerning James Randi's challenge, you might find this article an interesting read: www.dailygrail.com/2008/02/the-myth-of-the-million-dollar-challenge/
@@EthanWiner The person I'm thinking of lives in NJ, so it's not an impossible meeting. So if they correctly identify their cable (which is their own design) out of a random line up that you provide, you'd have to chalk it up to luck? Or do you have to first find a nulled match of that cable in order not to be able to hear any difference?
@@bentonpix Yes, the first hurdle is ensuring the wires null, which I'm sure they will unless it's some goofy wire with a Bybee type lump in the middle to intentionally color the sound. So once that's satisfied, I'll swap wires while your friend listens, and he has to be correct every time. For a 1.6% confidence you have to be right least six times out of six. To reduce the odds of guessing correctly to only 0.8% requires being right seven times in a row.
Stop testing and start listening, I was very sceptical about Hifi cables and recently brought a power cable with the guarantee of returning if I didn’t see an improvement. I was actually staggered at the improvement it made to my pre amp, so much so I’m buying two more for my power amps. I’m now a believer of the difference in cables..
I'm sure you believe the sound changed with the new power cord. But it really didn't. The people who sell this nonsense know about the limits of hearing and they knowingly exploit it. So a money back guarantee means little. If I sell a $5 power cord for $300 and 3/4 of the people return it, I still make out like a bandit. You need to watch the Null Tester video linked in the video description above. That one is about RCA wires, but it's the same principle. If you watch the entire video you'll see that it *proves* there are no differences in the four wires compared.
Ethan Winer 100% I can hear a difference for the better. I’ve spent countless hours listing to my set up, when I changed the cable i was very sceptical like I said. I did two tests of my own. I picked one song know well and listened to it a couple of times then swapped out the cable and played again. First song was Ani DiFranco Everest. With the cable the imaging was amazing, her voice coming from slightly right and behind of the left speaker rather than from it. Other track I did back to back test with was Tracy Chapman Give me one reason. Again biggest improvement was the imaging and being able to perfectly pin point the exact location of the singer and instruments between the speakers. Now I don’t know much about why or how this made an improvement but it did. Maybe the unit can draw more power or there less interference from the shielding creating a clearer sound.? Also I wouldn’t call my system during that test hi end but clearly made a difference to me. Cambridge audio 851n preamp Cambridge audio 851w pair in mono Q acoustic 3050 speakers Speaker cable is cheap 10 awg ofc. Power cable was MCRU no.75 plugged into pre amp. Speaker positioning is 30’’ from rear wall, 3/4’’ toe in, 90’’ apart and setting positions 90’’ away.
Did you watch and understand my Null Tester video? I guess not. For extra credit, read the few short articles kinked in that video's description for an explanation of *why* people believe they hear differences that don't really exist.
Ethan: Paul, explain to me the objective benefits of your $1000 interconnects.
Paul: Aahhh, good question. I remember hiking in the woods north of my house. No, wait... it was south. Well, really more south-west. It was a warm sunny day. I remember this because it was unusual for September. The birds were singing and the squirrels were foraging for nuts, you know... like they do. Any-who... PS cables are the best.
Paul is a salesman, full stop.
His "opinions" are heavily greased with the very snake oil he SELLS.
Debating a salesman is akin to debating a politician. Obfuscation, non-answers, eluding the questions and, especially, clouding the issues with double speak and subject changes are stock & trade for both.
You hit the nail on the head with Paul's expected response here!
CraftAero damn the first part of your write up was hilarious I definitely agree with you Paul is a very good salesman
Who is talking about $1000 interconnects? How much did Ethan's test equipment cost? Should he had bought some cheap Chinese knock-offs since all test equipment is the same?
LOL, you said exactly what was on my mind. Sadly, audio is fraught with snake oil. We all enjoy audio so much we take it seriously....
@@jimolson9671
Paul could sell a lump of coal labelled "Pre-Diamond".
99.9% of us ain't buyin' it but some poor sucker's wife is sporting coal on her finger and trying to convince her friends and family that it's superior to their shitty "current diamonds".
Back in the 90's, I used to work in a high-end HiFi shop, I was kind of a gopher and all-around doer of what needed to be done, dusting and keeping things clean, cleaning the bathroom, helping with setting up auditions, loading heavy gear, etc.
One day this guy comes in, he was purchasing a very high-end CD transport and a DAC to go with it. Of course, there were listening auditions to make sure this was what he wanted. After a few songs, he said "it sounds good, but it's a bit flat sounding", this is over $10,000 (in 90's money) worth of gear we're talking about LOL. So, the sales weasel recommends an external clock source (another $3k) and has me do the setup. I connect the clock source to the DAC's word clock input and then we put on the same CD he was listening to before. About halfway through the first song, the customer says "WOW! the everything sounds so much more OPEN and the detail and sound stage are also improved, I'LL TAKE IT!". Cool, whatever, another sale! He even sprung another $250 for the high-quality BNC cable.
As I was boxing everything up, I then noticed the DAC had a small switch on the back panel labeled "Clock Source" with "Internal" and "External" being the two options. I didn't have the heart to say anything, but that switch was set to "Internal" the whole time. I kept my mouth shut, switched it to "External", boxed everything up and sent the customer on his way. I never said anything for fear of losing my job, but it just goes to show how easily perception can be influenced.
What a great story, thanks for posting.
Love it ❤
Ha! That reminds of me of studio sessions where a vocalist or musician got a little too hands on while I was mixing. Most of them are professionals and know to ask instead of touch, but some kept asking for intangible corrections on their vocal or instrument.
In the worst cases, I marked an EMPTY channel as "LEAD VOX" and told them, here's the EQ, here's the compressor, here's the level, here's the pan, go to town. Sculpt it, give it your own flavor. And they's spend hours tweaking it. At the end of the mix, they'd be like, bro, that vocal is really stellar now huh? Not knowing I dailed it in 6 hours ago and nothing had changed since. Yeah, bro, it's perfect, great job!
I'm an audiophile audio engineer and I can attest Paul McGowan is a clown.
This debate would never happen for the same reason that audio reviewers never do blind listening tests. It would show that these reviewers couldn’t identify which cable lifted the veil, widened the soundstage, and paid their salary even if their life depended on it.
You are absolutely right
Well... thunderf00t debated with wesbro Baptist Church so... Anything's possible :-)
Some "audiophile" forums have even BANNED the discussion of double-blind tests. If you even mention the idea you are banned from the forum.
This test will solve nothing except how Paul and Ethan hear things. The real point is if YOU hear a difference. If it sounds better to you (not Paul or Ethan) than buy it, if you don’t hear a difference, why would you buy it?
What test?? The actual TEST was done in this video:
th-cam.com/video/ZyWt3kANA3Q/w-d-xo.html
This is just a debate about measurable, observable things.
As someone pointed out, there is NOTHING to debate, here. Ethan already proved that WITH the null test. This I guess would just be entertainment. But I'm guessing that Paul fellow will decline.
Is Paul really the one to go after on cables? Go after Audioquest,Wireworld, Kimber etc
I challenge Paul not on wires, but on all the bad advice and outright mis-truths he spreads with his videos. A lot of people want to know the truth, and much of what Paul says is simply not true.
The real difference between these cables and amplifiers is that Paul has to address (read sales) it to prospective customers and you have to address it at AES & university students.
The debate should end with playing Ethan's "A Cello Rondo", on a PS Audio system.
But you came across this cello Ethan, it made me laugh very, very much :-)
😂
The more educated I became in electronics and audio, the further it pushed me away from many in the high-end community. There is just too much magic and fantasy taking place of fact. They listen to audio jewellery, not music. The snobs dismiss those who measure as "tin ear meter readers" and claim to hear the unhearable. They make claims of cable that somehow gain (vs rolloff) is involved. They also violently dismiss null and abx/dbt testers as "Inconclusive, or polluting of the original signal." History is littered with the crushed egos of those that failed blind amplifier and cable comparisons. Dunlavy used to demo his flagship speakers with a fake cable swap out that totally fooled the cocksure audio snobs in attendance. They live in a world that is like religious fundamentalism in denial of science. They also lean heavily on higher price always = better sound. When it comes to being on the side of engineers or audio mystics (especially those who make products they tout) I choose the engineers perspective. Science FTW \o/
Wow, this totally nails it. Well said. And so true. I think one problem is people have a hard time admitting they were scammed, even just to themselves. So they dig in and defend their unfortunate purchases rather than face the truth. My Null Tester demo video linked above *proves beyond all doubt* that the wires I tested all pass audio the same. The video clearly shows what the device does and how it works, yet some people choose to remain willfully ignorant.
Ethan Winer it has to be rooted in “ Alpha audiophile” ego. They paid 30 grand for a couple of speaker cables and damn it... they WILL hear a difference, and it’s ALWAYS better to them, never just different. They cannot be contradicted by proof as it would give them permanent psychological damage or harm sales of those that advertise with them. They will never accept the magnitude of their delusions. They always caveat the results "Yeah but..." (One alpha insisted that double-blind testing generates more false/erroneous/biased results than standard auditions.) They cannot handle any mitigation to their Alpha golden ear/audio expert status. I've seen a knock-down drag-out fight at a hi-fi dealer in Virginia. Two 50-something guys flying out the door into the street. The argument? Measured vs magic speaker cables. The defenses are always the same. 1) They have a better ear. 2) They spent more 3) They know more 4) Tests don't matter (unless it favors their opinion) 5) You cant afford it, so you are just angry about that. These same alphas cannot pass a blind abx/DBT but they will be the first to tell you how your system sounds and quality therof without hearing it.
the audiophiles are audiofools...in many cases, more money than sense....of course, that is until AFTER they buy their Brilliant Pebbles...then is all seems to equal out!!! :)
Exceptionally well stated comment !
If I were a manufacturer of preamplifiers and power amplifiers, I definitely would not be claiming that cables make a difference with my equipment since that implies some pretty serious design issues if small changes in the characteristics of the cable (probably capacitance) affect performance.
Yes, great point.
I had already done my own null tests with 5 cables from Monster, Mogami, Gepco, Reference and (tsc tsc) Spectraflex. A much more basic test, just taking the signal out of the D/A converter, through each one of the cables, and recording it again through the A/D converter. ALL OF THE CABLES nulled themselves. So, I don't waste my time anymore.
Thanks, I wish more people would do this type of testing. It would save them a lot of money!
this is flawed... of course a nulltest doesnt show the difference because the difference is small .. a 1khz doesnt become a 1,1khz sinewave...
tho i heared it myself and cables do matter, you can keep thinking the nulltest "shows it all" and keep fooling yourself
103+ people that bought $1,000 Cables disliked this video.
Is this guy (Paul) the equivalent of homeopathie charlatans, but for sound ?
I have 2500$ speaker cable.. its connected to about 30 grand of audio..
I sometimes swap it for 10$ cable to see the differences.. they are minor. I wouldnt be able to blind test.
But i could easily blind test xlr cables. Not speaker cables.
The differences are so small it's not worth the money.
I just keep them for the hell of it
Lol
@@mysas5983 Not all the time, but sometimes, definitely.
Ironic right? Like the octopus said, there's a sucker born every minute.
I have expensive cables that I found in a dumpster. They work great but don't sound one bit different from any other adequate cheapo cables I've used? What am I doing wrong? Did the dumpster somehow drain all the mojo out of the cables? ;)
I was okay with this video, until you decided to take an unnecessary cheap shot at Paul’s pronunciation of “timbre,” in what is apparently a sad little attempt to assert what you see as your intellectual superiority. Paul is always gracious and understanding in his videos. You, clearly, are not.
+1
yeah man! what?
what's this about crazy Paul stuff?
Paul has to be "gracious and understanding" as he is selling a myth that cannot withstand debate. Audio engineering is mathematical. Sound "is' or "is not." Same with pronunciation or mispronunciation of language. Paul is inaccurate regarding audio and English. He deserves to be hammered.
1111 Hammer away in his zone man!
I have heard cables sound remarkable different. Same for DACs, pre-amps, and amps.
No, you haven't hear a difference you only think you did. My Null tester demo proves this. You really need to watch that video, it's linked in the description. The issue is the frailty of human hearing. You think you hear a difference between wires, but there is no difference. At least not with most wires. So this is the answer, and you and Paul will either have to accept it or be forever wrong. There's no other way to say it.
Everyone who owns a stereo hears a difference every day they turn it on.
So I'm guessing Paul never took you up on your offer? I heard he also said he was going to make a video demonstrating the audible difference between cheap and expensive cables, but that never happened either. In his response to you, he also laughably claimed that EMI isn't electrical. Then what the heck does he think the E stands for!?
All good points, and No, Paul never accepted. He said he would initially, then reneged.
Are those speakers on the background next to your monitors the Rolands ma8>? 😎
Yes, they're petty good for $100 computer speakers.
This crazy thing called a "blind listening test" exists for anyone who want to know who the salesman is.
Yeah, you mean like this one, for instance?! : th-cam.com/video/GTwwvY8Is1o/w-d-xo.html
Then Ethan should have no problem taking it, right? I mean, I've seen a guy in a demo room, an engineer, once claiming there could be no audible - not to mention measurable - differences in cables, who then was struck by said difference, get up, yelled it was imposssible, and leave the room. Where does that get everybody?
I watched about 8 PS audio videos before I got to the snake oil one.
I really love what Ethan is tryin to do. A lot of respect. We need more people like him.
I don't know, Ethan always comes across to me as being a little too cocky. I recall seeing a video of his home listening room and it appeared rather junky to me. There are musicians who are technically adept and then there are artists who inject emotion into their music. I'm not saying at all that I think $1K interconnects are necessary but rather than debate Paul, I would like to see Ethan have a conversation with Nelson Pass.
@@falconquest2068 Why? Because Nelson Pass has any type of superiority over the rest of people interested in high quality reproduced sound?
Sorry. Nelson Pass is just an audio designer with a lot of non scientific prejudices, like too many others.
@@falconquest2068 Not cocky, but confident and with good reason. He simply knows what is to Paul a mystery. I know this because I too know what Ethan knows and Paul doesn't.
I was really hoping that when I opened this the full title would read, “Ethan Winer challenges Paul McCartney to a duel.”
I have a hell of a lot of respect for his guy. It's high time we all stopped swallowing the bullshit of certain audio engineers who think they know everything, and my God, they're countless.
The worst part is the people who are suckers, and stupid enough to actually believe that a $3,000 pair of audio cables make a difference. Etc. and Etc. and Etc.
Great video, you remind me when in 1985 Bob Carver took on Stereophile Magazine's challenge to duplicate the $6,000 Conrad Johnson Premier Four in 48 hrs without even knowing what he was trying to match (the Conrad was in a black box), which he did successfully and proved it in a null test to later market his cloned amp for $400.
Genius !
You, Sir, are quite correct, in that every meaningful parameter of an amplifier, such as gain, total harmonic distortion and signal-to-noise ratio can easily be measured! As far as "timber" is concerned, this is a non-issue, as the ideal amplifier should have NO timber! Timber comes (or SHOULD come) from the sound source, not the amplifier! It's job is to faithfully reproduce the sound source: any variation from the input signal constitutes distortion, and can absolutely be measured!
Yes, of course. If only more people understood these simple facts.
@@EthanWiner This was Linns philosophy with the Linn Sondek LP12 Turntable. It still is with their overpriced Klimax streamer.
So when is the debate ? I have been waiting.....
Ethan Winer indicated in a reply to this same question early on from another commenter that Paul McGowan initially agreed to the debate, but subsequently changed his mind and backed out.
Yes, if the amplifiers measure the same on numbers they should sound differently because of - Circuit board, Capacitors, Resistors., Power supply (how clean it is. etc). Would you think all of these will make the "exit" amplifier sound different?
I think you meant to say should *not* sound differently?
There is no point having a debate when someone believes their point of view is cast in stone.
That is exactly one reason for a debate. When two positions are irreconcilable and both arguing they do not try to convince each other but the public.
I'm sure McGowan knows he's selling snake-oil, but money has a curious way of destroying our decency.
I liked Paul at first, but then I heard him say things that quickly changed my mind. If I remember correctly from one video, he says swapping power cords is a great place to start in improving the sound you get from your system. I have limited electrical background, but I'm fully in the camp that says equipment sounds the same if it measures the same.
Maybe this will discredit me, but I have a set of studio monitors for my PC and another for my TV setup. I figure they're good enough for me if they're good enough for the people who mix and master.
Very well articulated points. I agree with all of your points, Ethan. I do, however, have one point I'd like to make in Paul's defense. He's right about one thing - sometimes you can hear a difference in two signals that perfectly null, though he's wrong about us not knowing why. Psychoacoustics is why - and no, it doesn't mean that he's hearing a difference simply because he wants to. The cochlea actually has efferent (signal-sending) nerve fibers coming from the brainstem, which are connected to various parts of the brain including the visual cortex. What that means is that the signals from the ear to to the brain are actually modified based on what we are seeing, thinking, and feeling. How many times have you turned a knob or pressed a button on an EQ or a compressor on a muted channel and heard a difference in the mix? I know you've done it - all engineers have. A similar thing happens when someone buys overpriced voodoo wires. They see the wires, they expect a difference, and they actually hear one. The only caveat is that the change is only audible to them because that change happened entirely within their own nervous system. So if we want to be scientific and logical about things, we have to acknowledge that we all hear things differently based on our own thoughts and assumptions. A methodical approach with null testing is, of course, the only way to reorient our ears and challenge ourselves when we think we hear a difference in such situations.
Yes, of course it's well known that people imagine hearing things that don't exist. But the purpose of the null tester is to prove that a $3 RCA wire sounds the same as a much more expensive wire with BS "directional arrows." So for whatever reason people think Wire A sounds "better" than Wire B, they'd save a lot of money if they understood the difference was imagined and not real. There's also this:
ethanwiner.com/believe.html
ASR sent me. Learned a lot and saved a lot of money from the site. Thank you very much.
Thanks, check out some of my audio educational videos:
th-cam.com/video/Zvireu2SGZM/w-d-xo.html
Speaker cables sound different, from copper cable, silver coated copper cables and thin cables like door bell cable.
What you're comparing then is the resistance, not the cable material...
But can you explain how they "sound different"? In treble content etc. or in volume? No response means you are imagining things. If you CAN actually answer I might believe you. But if you can't explain how it sounds "different" then obviously it just doesn't.
Why not find two cables that measure the same, sound different (according to Paul) and then have a blind listening test?
There's no such thing as two wires (or anything else) that measure the same but sound different.
@@EthanWiner just because two wires measure the same and you don't hear a difference doesn't proof that others also don't hear a difference.
Edit: instead of throwing claims at each other the whole thing could so easily be settled with a blind listening test
@LD Blake if the difference is just imaginary, then again a blind listening test will solve this.
Also, what makes you so sure that not hearing a difference is not a trick by your brain as well, because you DON'T want to hear a difference?
@@Simon-dn9kv Yes, a blind test is fine, but even better is my Null Tester demo that *proves* all four wires I compared sound the same, with no chance that "others" might hear a difference:
th-cam.com/video/ZyWt3kANA3Q/w-d-xo.html
@@EthanWiner The brain is able to notice differences which shouldn't make a difference, like lowering the noise floor from -180db to -200db, which Rob Watts did proof.
Now I'm wondering, would your Null Test be able to detect said noise floor difference?
YES!!!!! Timbre part makes me happy. You are the best!
When I purchase interconnects , my criteria is a decent build quality and the appropriate length , this minimises the chance i will need to replace them in the future. But that's just me.
The cable snake oil is really annoying. I'm glad that more engineers are coming around and showing test results to show that there is no audible difference in many of the products that they are stating are better. So ridiculous to think people are willing to spend 7 thousand on a cable
I dont think Paul wants you outing him and his fancy, audiophile, $1000 interconnects... that "sound" the same as $20 interconnects from amazon.
I'd like to see this debate, but please get an independent moderator to facilitate the discussion.
@Score Mix See, that's why they need a mod!
@@periurban
I fully agree.
Although I have some pre-disposed opinions on the matter, these two GIANTS outweigh them in every way. As a seasoned P.Eng myself (Mech) I'd volunteer to provide transparent and well experienced moderation if they'd like.
@@CraftAero You should approach them.
James Randi, please :)))
Yes but this moderator better be technically astute enough, and have a good BS detector.
It should be safe to say that without audio engineers like Ethan we would not have great recordings, and without audio product designers/sellers like Paul and his company we would not have great equipment to reproduce those recordings on. However, as a retired professional engineer myself I have to agree with Ethan on this, but Paul’s sometimes ethereal explanations of all things audio can be quite interesting too, so I keep watching.
@Ethan: I’ve always wondered if you can measure stereo imagining and separation. There must be a way to quantify that, right?
Yes, but that has nothing to do with measuring fidelity. Imaging is a function of echoes and reverb, either embedded in the recorded source or from reflections in your room. There's nothing a power amp or wire etc can do to affect imaging.
@@EthanWiner Would I not be correct in saying that varying amounts of crosstalk between one cable and the next could affect imaging and separation?
@@EthanWiner Hello Ethan, very informative your videos. Thanks. Regarding "Imaging" I have seen the term "Soundstage" .... Is "Imaging" and "Soundstage" the same thing? I guess "Soundstage" is more related to the position of instruments? In many Beatles albums you can clearly hear guitars on one speaker and vocals on the other speaker... I guess thats "Soundstage" while I think "Imaging" is what you already mentioned a function of echoes and reverb? Im a bit confused but Im sure you are right about "Imaging". Thanks will continue wathching your videos it is so refreshing to find sense and honesty in all this audio world. Thanks a lot!
So did you guys actually have a debate? I can’t see it anywhere but I’d love to watch it if it existed
Initially Paul agreed, but when I tried to set it up he reneged. No real surprise.
Paul also says that speaker wires can sound different depending on the direction they are run. I.e.: swap them end for end and see which way sounds best. His explanation being that the metallic crystal structure of the wire can have a effect. He goes on to state that certain "High end" cable manufacturers can draw "mono-crystal" wires that need to be installed in a defined direction. This is why some audio cables ha directional arrows printed on them.
Yeah, right.
When it comes to audiophile grade equipment of any kind, there's always going to be that guy with more money than brains. The one who freaks out because his speaker cables are "BACKWARDS!" These are the ones that fall for the snake oil salesmen who sells him $20 per foot gold plated wires when a plain old spool of lamp cord wire from the hardware store would do just fine. I design signal cables for scientific instruments in extreme environments. My electrical engineers are more worried about impedance, shielding, and tribological noise in bending cables and couldn't care less which direction its running. What they care about is whether it transmits an accurate signal after many years of abuse. The life of a speaker wire in an audiophile listening room is fairly sedate.
Paul is an idiot who says also "it's bit-perfect but the bits have noise" to digital interconnects
Right behind you Ethan ,time to dispell the myths and lies peddled by sellers of audio gear for their own gains. Science and fact will always overcome!!
Ethan at round 0:50 in this video you claim that your null tester proves beyond doubt that wires sound the same. This is a very foolish statement. Tell the good people watching what your null tester actually compares and what it does not compare please. because after all the bamboozlement of achievements you state at the begining of the video I cannot take you serious when you claim your null tester proves two wires sound the same.
@LD Blake Hey. I agree with all you have said. Ethan may be able to prove that two cables carry the same signal from point a in a system to point b without any losses or additives withing the limits of the equipment measuring. Having done that it is reasonable to say that it is hard to understand how an expensive cable may sound different than a cheap cable. BUT it most certainly does not prove beyond doubt that two cables sound the same.
The Best instrument for measuring sound is the human ear. If people are willing to spend silly money on cables and interconnects then is probably because they can hear a difference. Because a difference in sound may not be measureable it does not prove a difference does not exist.
Has anyone ever done a blind test to see if people can hear a difference in components of a system?
@LD Blake We most certainly are talking about Sound. as per my first post above Ethan claims that he has proven that the two wires sound the same, People buy expensive cables because they believe they sound different, We are most definitely talking about Sound.
The question is can two different sets of speaker cables for example within a system contribute to different Sounds as heard by peoples ears.
Ethan claims that by taking two cables and having a Null test result means its impossible to hear a difference. This is a stretch of logic.
Only a test using people and their ears would tell you if they sound different.
I myself have heard a difference in speaker cables. No doubt the null test would say its impossible, I say I can hear a difference. Its Proven end of story.
@@wickie2222 Have you performed a Blind test? One of them could be out of order...
Playing with words asside, the way we reproduce sound is ( as for now ) with electric current alternating through a transducer ( speaker ) so the only way for a cable to sound different is by altering in some way the electrical signal passing through it.
What Ethan measures is just that, with a resolution that exceeds what superman could perceive.
I think the cables do really look different one being much more fancy and stylish than the other even that little directional arrow... so nice and cool ( of course useless since the current goes both ways ) . Stick to that and you won't have to fool yourself.
See and this is how it looks like when you're clueless...cables to do not carry music. It's electric signals which do not give two shits about riding a piece of copper strang or a gold strang...the signal remains identical in both cases.
It's like these stupid guys that buy a 500usd hdmi cable vs a decent cheaper one.
It's only 0 and 1 going through it ...lol
@@wickie2222 stop your bs...i dare you to blind test your claims i can already tell you. You would fail as many many maaaany have before you..
You're only wrong on one thing in this video, Paul really doesn't mean well.
Yeah, good point.
It’s the hi-fi, audiofool crowd… headphone cable is another one..
Looks like Paul chickened out
Who really gives a F--K, just sit back and enjoy the music!
@@robertm.5816 mixing & mastering is one of those things that never gets the credit it deserves cos its the art of hiding flaws so ya never knew they were there, & never knew what went into making it right.
My spouse and I are now separated... and it started with a debate : ) Good luck!
You should have a 3rd party moderator.
@@grandmasmalibu - genius! Perhaps you could channel the ghost of Charleston Heston for the debate?
@@grandmasmalibu Fortunately, not many people are going to get suckered into buying $5000 power cords. If they can? Why worry about them? They will not see poverty as you seemed so concerned about. Look at Pangea power cords. Not very expensive and can make a nice difference. That is, if your system is transparent enough to find out.
@@genez429 Pangea, oh, so those are the ones that make a difference!!!! And of course, the all encompassing, IF your system , blah blah blah...if it's such a great improvement, it should be heard on anything. If ya play a CD on any stereo, and play the vinyl version of the same album, wanna bet the CD will sound cleaner, cleaner, snap, pop and no Fremeritis artifacts
@@genez429 Meaningless waffle. Power cables, I.e. an inexpensive properly rated simple 3 core mains cable will work just as well as an expensive one. That is a scientific fact and easily provable using modern test equipment.
@@cbcdesign001 On your system it will.
Hi, can you tell me what instrument can measure soundstage, depth, layering? I think with your years of experience, this will be an easy question.
One way to measure width is with a phase correlation meter. Mixing engineers use this to assess mono compatibility, to ensure that no elements will drop out when a stereo mix is reduced to mono. For example over AM radio or for music on hold. But generally, width and sound stage, or whatever you like to call it, is all about left-right channel differences. Mono music has no width at all, of course.
A common technique in rock music is to have the rhythm guitar player play the same part twice. Then one track is panned hard left and the other hard right. Because these are different performances the two parts are never exactly in sync. And this creates a huge very wide sound. I've done similar using a rhythm guitar on one side and an electric piano on the other. Both are playing the same chords but, again, the differences create a very pleasing wide sound. In fact, this can be *too* wide, so it's common to pull the two parts in a little so they're not panned fully left and fully right.
I'll add that classical music is often recorded with two main microphones, then additional "spot" mics are placed close to softer instruments like the harp, or a soloist playing a concerto. But the main mics pick up different parts of the orchestra, and the natural reverb they capture is also different left and right. When mixing pop music we almost always use stereo reverb, and that can make even a single performer placed in the middle sound large and wide.
@@EthanWiner thank you for the answer. The reason i ask is because i have 2 amplifiers, one is cheap and the other one is a little more expensive. I can test it over and over, and know which has better depth and layering. If i use that correlation meter, will that show the difference in amps?
Also is there an acceptable measure for depth and layering using the correlation meter?
Thinking about this further, width isn't something you'd usually measure directly, but you could. If you subtract the left and right channels, similar to how my Null Tester works, whatever remains is the difference amount. If the left and right channels are totally different, then the width is at maximum. So I guess this "measurement" would be expressed as a percentage of the sum of the left and right channels. This video explains my Null Tester in detail:
th-cam.com/video/ZyWt3kANA3Q/w-d-xo.html
There's nothing an amplifier type circuit can do to affect the width or depth of music. Width and depth are related to left-right channel differences as I already mentioned, and also the strength and timing of reflections, both single echoes and reverb (which is just more and denser echoes). Assuming both of your amplifiers are working correctly, I'll bet you $100 that you would not be able to tell which one sounds "wider" in a proper blind test.
Not going to get in to the Paul vs Ethan part , but I ask a question. If everything is measurable ,then every manufacturer should be making a near perfect product ( that should sound roughly the same) especially with electronic products. Even with sub "audiophile" manufacturers, Denon, Onkyo, Pioneer etc etc ... etc. they should all be able to make a near perfect products because they have the measurements and electronic components for manufacturers are cheap.
Yes! And these days most audio devices do indeed sound the same. That is, most are clean enough to not color the sound audibly. So if they have no sound, then by definition they sound the same. Reports to the contrary are usually due to people not knowing how to do a listening test properly. I recently submitted an article about listening tests to a major audio magazine, but it's not out yet so I can't link to it here. Hopefully in another few weeks it will be in print, and then soon after online.
@@EthanWiner They DO NOT sound the same!
@@RandyShirley You don't even understand the limitations of your own hearing.
After one of PS Audio's $6K USD DACs was performance analysied, and found to be less than SOTA (a $99 USD barebones one outperforms it) despite its marketing to contrary, and the subsequent confidence game they tried to run as an explanation about that, I seriously doubt that Paul will take you up on the debate. He's well aware that anyone with even a basis understanding of technology will see the flaws in his arguments.
IMO Paul knows well the reality about cables, but selling a low-tech device (i.e. fancy looking cable) in an insane price is very profitable! :D The consumers believe in snake oil. More expensive placebo is always better! :)
Same with that chubby-faced buffoon from Audioquest. I'm SURE he knows he's lying to everyone, but those lies are buying him an enormous house, a luxury car, and all the fancy steak dinners he can cram into his stupid face 😂
Dear Ethan, I thought Amir at ASR was my favourite TH-camr, but I think you might've just beat him to the top spot 😂 Well...equal first place 😊
Today I've been responding to comments from some poor, deluded guy who thinks "audiophile grade" AC power fuses can improve the sound of a hifi system. It's exhausting! Also, a so-called "professional engineer" who thinks Neutrik XLR connectors are crap, and replacing them with fancy (expensive) ones will make a worthwhile audio quality gain. 🙄🥱 Anyway, thank God for people like you!
Aside from all that, we all know EXACTLY why Paul McGowan, the "engineer" from Audioquest, and "Danny" whatever-his-name-is (GR Research) will never agree to a debate (or truly blind listening tests) with a REAL engineer. Maybe I should include the word HONEST, as well, since many of the hifi charlatans probably know damn well that many of their products are worthless, scam items.
Thanks for your great post.
"No culture in human history ever suffered because its people became too reasonable or too desirous of having evidence in defense of their core beliefs."
- Sam Harris
The first half of that quote is one thing and the second another. "Desirous" of having evidence in relation to "core beliefs" is fine and dandy if those core beliefs are relatable to your own. Core beliefs could involve sacrificing a whole population because in the long run it will solve global warming and food shortages according to evidence on hand; but is it actually morally correct? People and cultures would indeed suffer. Sam is smart and probably meant well, but the quote is messy and probably missing context. I give it a 2 out of 10.
Even tube amplifiers vs solid state amplifiers would sound the same with then null tester?
Oh no! Did you watch the Null Tester video? A good solid state amplifier will have distortion less than 0.01 percent, which equates to -80 dB. But even really good tube amps have trouble trying to beat 1 percent distortion over the audio range. So that would yield a very obvious residual difference.
Ethan Winer Thanks for updating this guys Statement, Thanks for teaching us
Is there really a unit of measurement for the envelope of a transient? Just curious. I know we can analyze waveforms, but that really doesn't always tell us a whole lot for complex ones outside of amplitude and background noise.
What LD said, and also Rise Time.
He's (Paul) not going to publicly debate this issue.
You don't bother to debate with fools.
@@RandyShirley
Paul is the fool.
@Ethan Winer Have you tested a 500 watt perfect-square waveform on the same appropriate inert and reactive (capacitive and inductive and combinations) load with your Null-Tester and achieved identical results?
Yes I believe that could be done with appropriate attenuators on his box. And the squash the resistive dummy load quandry, if you can find a speaker with 500w power handling, like a stage touring array, you could use a real speaker load (although probably not in the same room!) There you go! Next idea to discredit the null test? P.S. You do realize there is no such thing as a perfect square wave? Infinite rise time? Not in this universe!
@Andy Delle Of course there is no "perfect" in our universe. That's just a "nitpicky" statement as one would normally assume "as close to perfect" as possible in this flawed universe. I'll just assume you are Trolling as my question was addressed to Ethan and clearly not you.
@Andy Delle AND, my question was just that, a question. As you seem to be Trolling I guess you "Assume" this was something you can Troll about. FYI, I am interested in finding out if there is a difference and if so what was it and what Ethan's analysis might be either way.
@@1dir951 This is a public forum. If you want to ask Ethan a question personally, then use EMAIL. It is quite acceptable for others to answer questions publicly. If I took your legitimate question as sarcastic, I apologize. But it did seem to me like another poke to discredit the null test. And I am hardly a troll - ask Ethan that. I am just one of those here who have a personal issue with all the audiophool crap. People are certainly free to buy what ever they want including fashion statements. Hell that's a multi billion industry on its own. The difference is that Prada is not making claims that their purse makes your cell phone achieve better coverage. Yet the audio trinkets industry freely uses junk science to sell their snake oil! that should at least be disclosed.
@@andydelle4509 I think that should be infinitesimal (as in '0') rise time.
Just a question: Ethan, how do you know that you can measure everything you can hear?
You need to watch the Null Tester video linked in the video description above. If you watch the entire video you'll see that it *proves* there are no differences in the four wires compared. So Paul is wrong that not everything can be measured.
@@EthanWiner This means that Paul doesn't know for sure what he designs.
What exactly is an Audio engineer?
Someone who designs circuits or components, or records or mixes music, or designs entire systems, etc. Selling audio products is not engineering.
I have a pair of expensive grado headphones and I have a 50cm grado extension cable. Im convinced that if I plug the headphone jack into this extension cable and the cable is brand new so all contacts with the plug and socket are new but I find the headphones sound is not quite so clear with the added extension. Is this possible or is it placebo.
When ps audio started selling the noise harvester, I switched off
I’m subscribed to both channels. Even though I like Paul’s attitude of making everything clean, good looking and the best quality possible, I’m really repelled by his ambiguous answers on meta-physics questions with his personal belief in the end. This is why I think that a well structured dialogue between these two channels is a win-win.
@
THD is outdated. Science have developed much better metrics.
google nonlinear distortion audibility.
Denis In your dreams....
Cool Audio Hacks Whatever... the claim is : you cannot measure sound... omg what does a Analogue to digital converter (ADC) do? what is the data that comes out from a ADC other then sound in the time domain? in other words sound pressure being measured and quantized 1 Giga times per second ( on a simple normal 1GSPS scope).
unfortunnatly this discussion will never end ...there is an all industry being fed on ignorance.
I think it would be better to assume this expensive gear is no more than pieces of art, not techicaly superior, but beautiflly crafted with art and good (expensive) taste. Does Mona Lisa reproduces its subject better than an ordinary modern camera would? course not but is not the reason why it is so valuable, right. its about art... So please be at least inteligent and play on your areas of comfort and expertise... don’t mix science with beliefs...
I think every loudspeaker / amp dont need to cost more than 1k to reproduce more than what you are able to hear. You may put diamonds on it and it will be more expensive...Still read the same measurements... but it may sound better... placebo effect
@@antoniolucena7304 Agreed. I'm pretty sure Paul knows about this video but he purposely ignores it.
Denis exactly!
"Hi, I'm Paul. I work at an audio manufacturing company and I rely on things I specifically *can't* measure to construct my products."
That's a good resume stuffer.
Paul panders to money, not science
So you get amps with identical (high end ) specs and they sound different. They do. Or the manufacturer's specs are lying. Feedback connected to loudspeaker terminals - how does the negative feedback of back EMF from the reactive electromagnetic speaker drivers affect things in the amp ? How does the amplifier react to load impedances which vary with output frequencies ? Amp specs just seem to be based on measuring sinewaves, squarewaves and the like across dummy loads which don't seem to take into account real world operating conditions at all. Why do valve amplifiers sound better in many people's opinion ? Why when more feedback is switched in do they sound less "alive" for want of a better term ? Can Null tests be performed on different amps and the same model of speaker loads ? Will tolerances on those speakers be tight enough to prove very much ?
You need to watch the Null Tester video linked in this video description above. If you watch the entire video you'll see that it *proves* there are no differences in the four wires compared. And those comparisons used music, not test tones. This is about wires, not amps. But you are wrong about amps measuring the same and sounding different. If they really do sound different, as proved by a blind listening test, then I assure you they won't measure the same. Of course you have to measure everything, not just 1 KHz at 1 watt into 8 ohms.
As for "valve amplifiers sound better in many people's opinion" you are correct that some people like the slightly distorted sound of tube gear. That's not hi-fi, and it's not what I like! But it's outside the realm of fidelity, and what can be measured, because it's preference. So that's not related to my criticisms of Paul's claims.
Well amps came up in the discussion - So let me ask you - (this isn't a criticism of you or your knowledge or experience in any way at all) how come you get amplifiers with low IMD, ruler flat frequency responses, low damping factor, low output impedance - that definately do sound different ?
I'm getting older now so my ears aren't what they were, but I have been interested in audio gear all my adult life and have really noticed this, and find the effect is real. It is said that the human ear can't detect less that 1% distortion so that can't be the reason. There is a school of though which believes negative feedback might be part of this. As for cables - I've found that provided the resistance, inductance and capacitance are low enough they are all the same, so there we agree! I also agree with your comments about measuring everything! I just wonder if we've all missed something! Thanks for the reply! :-)
PS: I'm also familiar with some of the work of Bob Carver having read about it online, who claimed to able to design an amp to sound like another, far more expensive one, which was accepted by many people, so maybe you do have a point. But if so why was there a difference in the first place if they were all highly specced ? :-)
@@shaunhw Manufacturing specs are provided to you by the marketing department to sell gear, not to educate, or provide any technical data that would survive proper scrutiny. They typically aren't lying, but are always far too abridged to be of any practical use. You have to measure everything. Providing everything wouldn't help sales, and might hurt them as the customer's eyes glaze over at the data, much of which they can't interpret.
AMPS:
An Amp's job in reproduction is to take the signal of recorded material, and amplify it, with nothing added or take away, and to do this doesn't cost a premium. When this is done, all amps will sound the same if not over driven. However, as an amp designer you can add coloration to the sound. This coloration is always very subtle, and if any was added, it is nothing compared to different speaker models. This is why it's always a laugh when folks discuss component matching. Component manufactures live by this ignorance. If your speakers aren't over driving the amp in some way, namely power or resistance load, the change from amp to amp will be spit in the ocean compared to speaker to speaker; or just moving the same speaker an inch or two in room. What Bob Carver did 20 years ago can be done easily with DSP, so in essence, find an amp that measures transparently (a pro class D amp will usually suffice) and by using DSP with computer software you can have unlimited coloration potential that you can change and adjust at anytime.
@@shaunhw I'll just add that amps that truly measure the same will in fact sound the same. In fact, they can measure differently and sound the same. For example, nobody can hear the difference between 0.002 and 0.005 percent distortion, but test gear can easily measure that. Most people have no idea how to do a proper listening test, and they don't even realize how difficult it is. You'd think it's easy! But it's not.
@LD Blake One difficulty with adding a controlled amount of distortion to music is the level of the music constantly changes. So if the music peaks at 1 volt, and you calibrate the clipping to a 1 volt sine wave, at any given moment the distortion on the music will be less. That's probably why you couldn't hear it until it got up to 6%. In my Damn Lies video Mike Rivers did something similar, but he also applied crossover distortion which works at the lowest levels rather than clipping the peaks:
th-cam.com/video/Zvireu2SGZM/w-d-xo.htmlm34s
I watch Paul the same way I watch Borat. It is a character that says outrageous stuff and some gullible people think it is reality. Love your keyboard.
I would love to see some of the systems belonging to the people in this comment section.
Marantz SA8005 CD player, Classe' Audio preamp/ amp, Sonus Faber Auditor M speakers, canare 4s11 speaker cables. MidFi by most standards.
Musical Fidelity DAC, Transport & Dual mono integrated. B&W 804d2.
Tidal - Chord DAC - Cambridge CXA60 - Epos ES11. Very basic but musical system.
Hard Drive speaker
mag 1981 I have an excellent system, in fact I have about 5 audiophile systems . Most of my components have been on a class A rated reviewers guide. I just look at Ethan's videos when I want to get a laugh at a "box wine person" who thinks he is saving money because his ripple gets you drunk for less money than a bottle of Veve Cliquot ( the buzz ain't the same) . I think most people who own crap sounding systems love Ethan because they think somehow their systems are as good as much more expensive ones. Ethan's advice is good for making her public address systems in the NYC subways, but not for sound enjoyment. And Ethan's association with with Tufts just shows he found a person with a greater level of ignorance there.
Impossible to measure. But Paul, how do you even construct something you cant quantify or measure? Its not electrical....you got that right. Its placebo. :)
Mr. Gowan addressed the question of "impossible to measure"in audio because there are not yet electrical tools that can duplicate how the human ears, inside a head, and then finally by the brain processes signals to create hearing.
I saw in interview on youtube with Edgar Villchur the founder of AR speakers and he said that when he did the live vs. recorded tests that gained AR worldwide recognition, he used zip chord to connect to the speakers. He pointed this out to prove that cables do not effect the sound quality at all. These tests that Vlilchur did helped put the AR 3's in the Smithsonian.
Years ago I owned a pair of AR-3a speakers, and they were fantastic. I'd still have them now except I gave them to my recording studio partner when he moved away.
@@EthanWiner I have my father's pair of AR-2a's that I had upgraded to 2ax. They still sound amazing. A testament to the build quality of that company back in their day.
@@EthanWiner I have a pair of AR-3a's Absolutely love them, I was wondering if many other people still had them they are still great after all these years!
I have no idea how many people might still have AR3a speakers. This is a good question to ask in an audiophile forum or Facebook audio group.
Did the debate ever go ahead Ethan?... Would love to see it, if it is somewhere?
Initially Paul agreed, but when I tried to set up a date and time he backed out. For obvious reasons.
I love audio, and home theater, but sadly most of it is a total carnival con. Paul's videos are exhibit A. I totally understand wanting nice stuff, but aside from the audio jewlery approach to audio gear, there's no benefit to the technology over most of the gear you find off the shelf at the local big box. Audio science is a very mature technology. Most of what you'll find today was known in the 70s, and little if anything has improved. What has improved if anything has more to do with implementation of domesticated reproduction, and not the implementation of the component engineering. There's no secret sauce that Paul has in his amps/dacs/pres etc.
I remember when stereo review did their double blind tests back in the 80's and no one could reliably pick 12guage speaker wire when compared to expensive cable. And they did another test where they couldn't reliably pick between the sound of a Pioneer receiver and a Mark Levinson Class A amp.
Then it all changed when the ad revenue fell because the high priced manufacturers got their panties in a wad.
Those people just didn't have "sensitive enough ears" - kidding.
Funny , I'm running an entry level 2018 Pioneer VSX-522 receiver in my hi fi and I wouldn't trade it for ANYTHING, it's absolutely transparent, smooth as silk, perfect bass, perfect mids, perfect highs, perfect soundstage, perfect depth, non detectable noise or distortion, no glare, tizz, opaqueness, no listening fatigue, no coloration, . . it does EVERYTHING the ridiculously expensive pre amp/ power Amp setups do, and just as well. Now if I hit the lottery and could afford Wilson Audio speakers then of COURSE I'd partner them with a higher priced front end , probably Dan D'Agastino or Constellation or such. . . But would I be gaining anything in all those aforementioned parameters?. . .probably not, only sheer power to drive the bigger speakers and more electricity used to listen to the system. . . Pioneer receiver + Paradigm top end speakers = end game for many lucky listeners😎
It's simple - the resistance of a fucking speaker cable is meaningless in the chain and even if it don't matter because it is linear - so a piece more on the volume control would make it gone - idiots waste money for cables, smart people nail the money on walls for acoustics which is 50% of what you hear
Although I am pro objective measuring approaches, there are still things you can't really measure regarding the loudspeakers output. Imaging qualities within the created soundstage is not really measurable and that is one of the most important characteristics in my oppinion. I'd love to hear from a methodology that is somehow able to measure that.
Please don't forget that as a good Engineer you should always be open minded about unknown anomalies occuring in a specific field that human kind hadn't been able to research or fully measure yet.
I am actually doing hands on research with different braiding and twisting techniques with the same cheap speakercable model and I am not happy about what I found out until now, because I'm not able to prove any of my findings scientifically...
having said that... of course paul is just trying to sell his stuff and ethan is just an oldshool engineer with a strict mindset. I think the truth is somewhere in the middle.
Try things out for yourself and have fun doing that!
Two separate disciplines;
Everything regarding the loudspeakers output can be measured, everything. Physics.
However, once you include imaging/soundstage characteristics, the elements of psychological and physiological responses move the science into Psycho-acoustics.
@@FOH3663 No. There is just physics at work that no one has come up with a way to perfectly measure, for each component in a rig. While Psychoacoustics is obviously real, and a huge element, BUT it is also the crutch of engineers to lay the weight of everything they cant explain.
Speakers and headphones are undoubtedly best tested with human ears. Cables, on the other hand...nope!
I never heard anyone explain what it is they hear which can't be measured. Soundwaves is what our ears pick up and soundwaves can also be measured. 🤷♂️
The standard answer from believers is "We don't know what we don't know." But that's not true with audio, which is very low-tech compared to computer motherboards, radar, FM radio transmitters, and so much more. Further, my Null Tester *proves* beyond all doubt there's no as-yet unknown property of audio:
th-cam.com/video/ZyWt3kANA3Q/w-d-xo.html
@@EthanWiner Thank you for replying, will watch other videos of yours. One question, I have never been able to tell any difference between speaker cables or power cables or any sort of "purified/filtered" powerstrips. However, I feel like I can pick upp differences quite easily comparing the most basic interconnects and better ones. Would you agree?
All competent RCA wires sound the same, as proved by the Null Tester video I linked above. There are many reasons people believe they hear differences in wires, even when there is no difference. The correct way to tell if you really can hear a difference is a blind test. But it has to be done correctly, and you have to choose correctly at least five or six times in a row to avoid guessing by chance. Here's a basic overview of wires:
www.soundonsound.com/people/sounding-wire
This explains one reason the sound reaching your ears really can change, but not because the wires are actually different:
ethanwiner.com/believe.html
And this explains in great detail how to do a proper listening test:
www.prosoundweb.com/discerning-differences-how-to-conduct-proper-useful-listening-tests/
Thank you @@EthanWiner I was unsure of whether or not interconnects were possibly differing from speaker cable but apparently not then. I have listened to recorded comparisons which definitely sounded different but then there must be other explanations like you have pointed out.
Notice I said "competent" RCA wires. Not all wires are competent, with some having so much extra capacitance they could lose high frequencies. Even more likely: RCA connections can become flaky over time. So just unplugging and re-inserting *the same* wires can sometimes change the sound and make it clearer.
One of these guys is trying to sell you something and the other is not. Can you tell them apart? And who do you trust the most?
How interesting! I have been listening to Paul for some time now, and I am very interested to hear your perspectives Ethan. I work in spectral (visible and non-visible) imaging, specifically in collection and analysis for agricultural research. In every case, the limitations of my sensor determine what I can measure, and in every case there is always far more there than what I can collect across a number of dimensions (spectral, time, spatial). The concept of measuring truly Everything seems nearly impossible, as no real measuring device has or claims to have zero error; I can see the debate having a hard time concluding what is good enough for an audio experience. Statisticians spend their entire careers dealing these exact issues.
You need to watch the Null Tester video linked in the video description above. If you watch the entire video you'll see that it *proves* there are no differences in the four wires compared. So Paul is wrong that not everything can be measured.
I agree Zero Defects. We simply don’t have the means as of this moment to measure everything when it comes to sound and how we perceive sound. We simply don’t know how certain circuitry and wire make ups can affect how we perceive the sound.
@@EthanWiner I finally had the opportunity to sit down and watch the video, and it is a fantastic device and experiment. I really enjoy how the device is able to detect such tiny differences (e.g. heat) as you demonstrate it in use.
I was only skeptical of the additional filtering to "remove ultrasonic error from the device" without more explanation (but you mention you will improve it in production). I am also a little confused about the "Null Dial" and how that needs to be adjusted to "find a null" and we are left to wonder what this setting means to your results, furthering this concern, I wonder how often it must be adjusted during an experiment. It seems as if these are countermeasures that are only in place to generate a more silent null output result.
I believe that your results are very informative. I feel as if this device is an excellent B.S. detector, and its ability to give a real time demonstration can be powerful. There are some questions about the device that I imagine would be answered in a more detailed article.
@@Adriana21709 Sorry but you are wrong. Everything audible can be measured. Not only measured, but measured to a resolution much finer than anyone's ears. Even basic test gear can measure noise and distortion 20-30 dB softer than anyone can hear. You claimed, "We simply don’t have the means as of this moment to measure everything when it comes to sound and how we perceive sound." That sounds like you have actual experience with this, but you obviously don't. Though to be clear, all I address is audio equipment, not how people perceive sound. That falls under psychoacoustics, and it too can be known. But that's not what this is about.
@@zerodefcts watch the video again and you'll see that I show both a block diagram of the tester with its Null dial, and also the schematic which is simple enough to follow.
My only question is how old is your keyboard????
LOL, I bought a Northgate PC in the late 1980s, and I still use its keyboard. It's a great keyboard! I can work the F-keys on the left without looking, and nobody sells such a keyboard anymore. The keyboard outputs 5-pin DIN, so I have a DIN to PS/2 adapter, and then a PS/2 to USB adapter. It actually works.
@@EthanWiner Probably as old as your Sonar version lol ;)
@@EthanWiner By the way I fully agree with your statements!
@@mtwoproductions i used to type on these keybords during my college days. Each key is a mechanical switch with a positive clicking feel.
What exactly are you trying to prove? If you don’t think there is a difference then just buy the cheapest product that will get the job done. However if I want to drop big $$$ because I think I can hear a difference what business is it of yours? I tend to agree with Paul in the regard that we only think we can measure everything that has an effect on the sound. People in the Middle Ages were absolutely positive that the world was flat. Bottom line is that whatever you are absolutely sure of is probably wrong. Having said that I doubt that I would be able to tell the difference between two high quality amps and I am sure that I cannot hear a meaningful difference in cheap vs expensive speaker cables. So for me I keep the purchases reasonable but if someone wants to drop $10K on speaker cables I don’t care.
You need to watch the Null Tester video linked in the video description above. If you watch the entire video you'll see that it *proves* there are no differences in the four wires compared. So Paul is wrong that not everything can be measured.
Thank you Ethan. I did watch your Null Tester video. Congratulations you did a very nice job on that piece of test equipment. I personally have never been able to tell any difference between cables but historically many times man ( or women) has been absolutely sure that they know the truth they have been wrong. I’m just saying that I do not rule out possibilities because I don’t believe them. I think you have to look at the entire chain from the source all the way to the speakers to truly understand audio reproduction. All of the links in the chain are affected by there connections to the other chains. Having said all of that, I do agree that expensive cables are “bullshit” and I would not spend my money on them. There are many other links in the chain that make a much larger impact. I find your videos entertaining and will probably watch some more of them.
@@JHuffPhoto While I mostly use cheap cables or make my own, there are places where a high-quality cable is desirable, like the cable you use to hook up a phonograph, or even speaker wire needs attention when used with a tube amp or other with a poor damping factor.
Hill's Workbench I totally agree with you and in his video about his Null Tester Ethan points this out. I would always recommend using a high quality cable but I personally do not buy cables that have been sprinkled with magic fairy dust and the price increased accordingly.
@@JHuffPhoto said, "I’m just saying that I do not rule out possibilities"
My Null Tester demo aims to prove only that the four wires I tested are all identical. And it does prove that. There are no other possible possibilities. :->)
Hi Ethan, I was just wondering if I could get your opinion on something. I got into audio a few years back when I bought an entry level AV receiver and a pair of bookshelf speakers. I've since upgraded the speakers and will be upgrading again in the near future. I wondered about upgrading my amplifier when I upgrade the speakers so I searched Google for "AV receiver vs stereo amp". It seems I stumbled across the worlds largest can of worms because some people were claiming the difference is night and day while others were saying all amps sound the same.
I researched the topic some more and came across various blind studies one of which involved an affordable stereo amp, source and cables being compared against a top of the line stereo amp, source and cables (unfortunately I couldn't find a blind comparison of a multi channel AV receiver vs a stereo amp). It seems this study is often sited in arguments on forums. The basic idea is that any competently designed amplifier when run within its limits (not close to or actually clipping) is indistinguishable from another regardless of price (or exotic cables etc).
Do you subscribe to this belief and what would you consider a "competent" amplifier. Basically, if I could go with an AV receiver, it would make my life a whole lot simpler as I have numerous devices, some of which use HDMI. However, the speakers I want to buy are a big step up in terms of quality and I don't want them to be held back by an amplifier that doesn't do them justice. It's difficult to find objective tests of AV amps and hi-fi amps as the vast majority of reviews are entirely subjective in nature and carried out by the same people that believe cables make a difference in sound quality.
Yes, most modern audio electronic devices are clean enough to be "transparent," so by definition they all sound the same. Of course, power amps vary by how much power they can output. So a 25 watt amp driven into distortion won't sound the same as a 300 watt amp that remains undistorted. In the larger picture, the best way to assess audio products is by their published specs rather than listening which is fraught with problems. This video explains all about how audio fidelity is defined and measured:
th-cam.com/video/Zvireu2SGZM/w-d-xo.html
There's also a huge amount of information about this large topic on my web site Articles page. Not just how audio works and is measured, but several articles explaining *why* people believe they hear differences that don't really exist:
ethanwiner.com/articles.html
@@EthanWiner Thank you very much for the reply. I appreciate it.
I agree with Paul. If measuring "what's best" was possible it would be a very simple job for reviewers to compare amplifiers and to say what's best. But there's not.
Why do you think it's impossible to measure what's best? Do you not understand how fidelity is defined? There are four parameters that define audio fidelity: Frequency response, noise, distortion, and time-based errors. Most of these have sub-categories, such as hum and buzz under Noise, and THD and IMD under Distortion. All of these can be measured and assessed.
While I like Paul's videos, I think you're right, he does indeed believe in a lot of "voodoo" and questionable opinions. I would certainly like this public debate to happen, it would be very interesting to see whether it can change Paul's opinion and maybe even lead to changes in how PS Audio designs their products.
"Believe" is perhaps giving him too much benefit of doubt since he is in the business of selling wire. You don't have to have any faith or belief in what you sell to make money, just convince others to buy it.
PS Audio would go bankrupt in a matter of days if the truth was revealed! Ain't gonna happen, is it?!
If amplifiers sound different, that literally means different pressure waves were created, thus scientifically measurable. If not measurable, you got placebo'd.
Yup, Paul is not looking good here.
Paul makes the assumption that something other than electrical signals powers speakers.
just a question,has anyone done a comparison test on TH-cam with say $5000 RCA cables on say a highend Mac to see if there is a difference in sound quality?
So what happened? Did Paul respond?
LOL, he sure did, with No. Such a chicken! :->)
@@EthanWiner Indeed, and that's a very nice way of putting it ;) We're living in an ocean of chickens...
The real issue is that Paul knows he can't possibly prevail in a discussion with me about audio fidelity and related issues. He knows that half the stuff he says is nonsense that's easily refuted.
@@EthanWiner Hi Ethan, thanks for actually replying to my comments, it means a lot, I'm a big fan of yours :)
Yes, this is what I meant with "that's a very nice way of putting it". In the strict sense he's not a chicken. I think "Charlatan" or "Quack" would be a more fitting way to describe his position. For me this kind of attitude fits well with the people, as described by you in the "Audio Myths" workshop, who camp at the big audio fairs and sell magic stones to attach to your mixer outputs.
This being said, I often feel isolated in audio land by my scientific approach. After 20 years of professional experience, I'm strongly getting the impression that audio people are not supposed to handle jobs by being true to the substance, as to a certain level are directors or cinematographers for example.
Some clients keep persisting on results based on their current mood or brainfart, without any regard for a professional approach. In other words, if one stays too true, one loses clients in case one deals with them too directly (in contrast to having a middle man who translates the vague crap people come up with). In other words, on some occasions it might be bad for business to contradict Paul’s ideas.
I’m not trying to redeem Paul here in any way, but audio land is a weird place. I happen to also do a lot of programming, and here things are completely different. Hence the contrast might be extremely stark to me personally.
For example: let’s say I have a problem with my Yamaha o2r, and I try to find a solution on the internet. I tend to get a lot of contradictory results, and I get the strong impression that the people who actually have the answer just sit on it, sometimes mainly to retain their dominance of the knowledge structure. As was the case with the whole apprenticeship thing back in the days in Europe.
If I search for a programming related question, even if it’s based on certain hardware or operating system types, I get tons of right answers, which are structured in a way so as to make it extremely easy for me to define which one fits my problem best. The contrast is jaw-dropping to say the least.
So, to make a long story short: I personally feel Paul is way out of line, but to the industry he’s probably, unfortunately, spot on in the middle of things.
Good post, thanks LB.
Has Paul McGowan ever heard of a spectrum analyzer?? I don't get it; it seems like this guy isn't worth debating?
You should first find out who Paul McGowan is and you will not make such inane remarks.
Paul McGowan is a good guy
@@Adamsvidios HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, of course he is, what has he sold YOU lately?
Cengeb what does it matter to you can't I have friends
@@genez429
This is the problem. Paul McGowan use his name to spread his bullshit...
Maybe he is a good engineer with a lot experience , but I don't have respect for those who have ignorant in other field and don't see this.
You could at least entice everyone by promising a nice panel of judges with physics PHD's and plenty of wine and cheese flavored popcorn for the audience.
Anyone else ever notice that Paul's questions are all in the exact same envelopes? Good question! LOL
Like Carnac The Magnificent!
hello Ethan winer from Australia i don't know if you can answer this question is any danger leave preamp and power amp on standby 24/7 or is better to put audio of when finish listen to music what is best thank you
I turn off my audio gear (and my computer) when I'm not using them. If I'll be back in an hour or less I'll leave it on.
@LD Blake I turn on my computer and audio gear around 10:00 am when I start my day. Not all my audio gear, just the stuff I need to play music and sound from TH-cam videos etc. If I'll be doing music work that day I turn on my big rig once when I start, then off when I'm all done. At the end of the day I turn it all off, around 5:00 or so.
When we watch TV In the evening over dinner and then after dinner, I power up everything - a receiver, active speakers, active sub, and either a TV set (while eating) or big screen projector (after dinner with the lights down). Then I turn it all off when we go to bed.
I think most people are like this, as opposed to turn on the computer, work for ten minutes, turn it off, then back on again half an hour later. Yes, that's not good. If I have to go out for a few hours but plan to come back to work, I turn off the LCD computer monitor but leave the PC running. My comment was mostly to address the belief that electronics should be left on 24/7. A lot of people believe that! I disagree, and I've been doing it my way for about 55 years with no problems or early failure.
Is Paul saying that something beyond frequency, amplitude and phase describes a sound wave that we are unaware of? Or is he saying that we don't have test instruments that are fully capable of measuring frequency, amplitude and phase to levels required when doing signal analysis work on audio electronics?
@LD Blake yep you are preaching to the choir here. Signal analysis on the voltages we send to our speakers is a basic and fundamental process for those of us who are in the field.
when i first found PS audio's youtube channel i thought oh gee great. but when he started saying that you can get better CD quality by drawing around the rim with black pen - i realized hes full of shit. he also shot down the idea of mixing in a anechoic chamber because 'monitors are designed to be in a room'. the guys a one man misinformation army.
I know it's a fool's errand to try to debunk all the audio bullshit on the web, but I try anyway!
I would love to see/hear that debate. I often talk-up acoustical treatments on videos such as those posted by Paul and other "audioholics" and "audiophile" channels. They don't seem to want to deal with acoustical treatment much at all.
I get the impression that acoustical treatment is considered an annoyance, at best, by companies who profit more from selling "audio magic" with active components rather than passive "audio magic" which rarely breaks or becomes obsolete.
Be careful, audio fans. Acoustical treatment has made my living room/theater/home studio sound so good, I never want to leave.
RB so true and well said. For my listening room, no amount of magic products or electronic upgrades came close to what proper acoustical treatment has done.
Everybody already knows acoustic treatment, speaker positioning, listening position etc, is essential in getting the best listening experience. McGowen often talks about this... however, I've never heard him mention "audio magic".
Electronics, cables, speakers, room treatments.... it ALL makes a difference!
@@cranestance8316 - Yet few people understand that acoustics play the biggest roll in what the listener hears. I'm speaking about home use in rooms which are roughly "living room" size, home theater, home recording studio, etc.
@@cranestance8316 - Most audio sales people don't specifically mention "audio magic" but it is heavily implied.
How many audio sales people ever mention "acoustic treatment" to their customers?
RB I agree 100%! I bought a lot of bass traps my current traps etc. from Ethan. Made a world of difference in my listening experience! This is far more important to me than any kind of cable measurement!
It's about time someone challenged the well meaning nonsense being circulated by people like Paul. Paul is immensely likeable and quite obviously genuine in his beliefs. It's a great pity for us that he's so deluded and that they are so demonstrably wrong, because they are costing the consumer unnecessary money. In one of Paul's more ludicrous videos he asserted that adding a valve pre-amplifier into the listening chain somehow 'improved' fidelity.
It was utter nonsense and threw into question Paul's definition of just what his mystical 'fidelity' is. I have an idea. Added distortion byproducts equals increased fidelity in Paul's world. The euphonious sounding mid range of valve amplifiers has to do with the fact that unlike transistor amplification valve amplification distortion byproducts are harmonically related to the signal causing that distortion, thus enriching (and by the way distorting) the original timbre. To Paul who clearly believes in hi-fi fairies this is mystically increased 'fidelity', to anyone with half a brain, it's nice sounding added distortion. Given a choice between Ethan Winer and Paul McGowan if sense is the criteria I know who I'd choose.
Haha Ethan, Paul won't entertain debates. You may enjoy this one: th-cam.com/video/katmUM-Xelw/w-d-xo.html
Good one Gene. Right, there's no such thing as synergy in an audio system. The goal of high fidelity is equipment that's faithful to the source. Most modern gear is good enough to be audibly transparent. In other words, it has no sound of its own. The notion that one device can compensate for the flaws in another, or even augment such flaws, is misguided. That's just not how audio fidelity works.
Amir who recently showed their powerplants don't work, even add distortion. Which was followed by a small campaign to smear his name, by Paul.
Seems the illusion is slowly fading as technology just shows the facts. Paul is an excellent salesman, but unfortunately he seems to try and pull a fast one on selling unneeded products.
A lot of snake oils in audio today. And everybody's buying it
It'll never happen, Paul said it on the forums he's ignoring you.
Probably because you can debunk his snake oil.
It'll never happen...and it shouldn't....because Paul is correct.
@@thepogue ahh yeah no, he only sounds correct because he's trying to get everyone to buy snake oil. This would prove Paul wrong.
@@thepogue Not in a million Sundays. Paul is as wrong as can be. Ethan Winer is a giant in knowledge compared to him. it's been proven many times that if you expect to hear a difference, you will. The mind is a strange thing like that. I'll give you this though, Paul sincerely believes the mystical mumbo jumbo he sprouts and he's a genuinely nice, decent man. Pity that his deluded nonsense costs so many people wanting their minds made up for them so much unnecessary money though.
@@pierrelailvaux9544 :))
No one has EVER produced an award winning product (like Paul has) buy measuring ALONE. The final test is in the listening!
So i replace speaker cable, my girlfriend comes home and asks why is sound different. Or, i take old tube amp with high measurable distortion and not so linear response, and it sounds much much better than the new class d amp, which measures almost perfect compared to tube amp. Trust your ears, only that counts.
@LD Blake sorry don't understand, what do you mean my 'used to hearing'?
@LD Blake sure, not once cable/amp that was great for me sounded really bad on some other system. Thats the whole beauty of searching for your hifi, otherwise you could just get something of the shelf (if we could precisely measure)
@LD Blake why there's no measurements like stage depth, width, imaging, warmth, timbar accuracy, etc, done by any company or institute? My 20+years experience of listening and buying hifi says that there's no measurements for most of things why we buy hifi
@LD Blake some speakers or amps are better at imaging and 3d soundstage, in any room. How can we measure that and quantify
@@hudo
"So i replace speaker cable, my girlfriend comes home and asks why is sound different".
Have you heard about bad contacts?
"Or, i take old tube amp with high measurable distortion and not so linear response, and it sounds much much better than the new class d amp, which measures almost perfect compared to tube amp"
You have ansered your 'question'. Maybe your speaker's bad response was compensated by the tube amp. Everything in the signal chain have to be measured otherwise the test is invalid.
How much would you offer as a prize if someone could positively identify one specific set of interconnects consistently throughout a blind test that rotates through several different brands?
James Randi offered $1 Million, and so far 20(?) years later not one person has stepped forward to try to claim it.
@@EthanWiner Somehow I don't think that James Randi would allow the correct identification of interconnects as part of his psychic challenge. I used to be able to identify different interconnects with pretty good accuracy, but my hearing isn't what it used to be, but I do know someone that can absolutely pick interconnects out with much better than 50/50 odds. Where are you located? If Paul McGowan doesn't accept your offer, maybe the guy I know will. And concerning James Randi's challenge, you might find this article an interesting read: www.dailygrail.com/2008/02/the-myth-of-the-million-dollar-challenge/
@@bentonpix I'm in western Connecticut, and I'm glad to have anyone who believes they can "hear" wires visit me for a lesson in why they can't. :->)
@@EthanWiner The person I'm thinking of lives in NJ, so it's not an impossible meeting. So if they correctly identify their cable (which is their own design) out of a random line up that you provide, you'd have to chalk it up to luck? Or do you have to first find a nulled match of that cable in order not to be able to hear any difference?
@@bentonpix Yes, the first hurdle is ensuring the wires null, which I'm sure they will unless it's some goofy wire with a Bybee type lump in the middle to intentionally color the sound. So once that's satisfied, I'll swap wires while your friend listens, and he has to be correct every time. For a 1.6% confidence you have to be right least six times out of six. To reduce the odds of guessing correctly to only 0.8% requires being right seven times in a row.
Stop testing and start listening,
I was very sceptical about Hifi cables and recently brought a power cable with the guarantee of returning if I didn’t see an improvement.
I was actually staggered at the improvement it made to my pre amp, so much so I’m buying two more for my power amps. I’m now a believer of the difference in cables..
I'm sure you believe the sound changed with the new power cord. But it really didn't. The people who sell this nonsense know about the limits of hearing and they knowingly exploit it. So a money back guarantee means little. If I sell a $5 power cord for $300 and 3/4 of the people return it, I still make out like a bandit.
You need to watch the Null Tester video linked in the video description above. That one is about RCA wires, but it's the same principle. If you watch the entire video you'll see that it *proves* there are no differences in the four wires compared.
Ethan Winer 100% I can hear a difference for the better.
I’ve spent countless hours listing to my set up, when I changed the cable i was very sceptical like I said.
I did two tests of my own. I picked one song know well and listened to it a couple of times then swapped out the cable and played again.
First song was Ani DiFranco Everest.
With the cable the imaging was amazing, her voice coming from slightly right and behind of the left speaker rather than from it.
Other track I did back to back test with was Tracy Chapman Give me one reason.
Again biggest improvement was the imaging and being able to perfectly pin point the exact location of the singer and instruments between the speakers.
Now I don’t know much about why or how this made an improvement but it did. Maybe the unit can draw more power or there less interference from the shielding creating a clearer sound.?
Also I wouldn’t call my system during that test hi end but clearly made a difference to me.
Cambridge audio 851n preamp
Cambridge audio 851w pair in mono
Q acoustic 3050 speakers
Speaker cable is cheap 10 awg ofc.
Power cable was MCRU no.75 plugged into pre amp.
Speaker positioning is 30’’ from rear wall, 3/4’’ toe in, 90’’ apart and setting positions 90’’ away.
Did you watch and understand my Null Tester video? I guess not. For extra credit, read the few short articles kinked in that video's description for an explanation of *why* people believe they hear differences that don't really exist.