Gee, a guy putting his name on something that doesn't work because he's paid to do so. Hard to believe.
Don't hate the player...
Hate the game...
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
ESP MusicCord
- Thread starter pdbass
- Start date
- Status
Don't hate the player...
Hate the game...
Sure. I even detailed an objective test in a previous post. If you're putting mechanisms in place to reduce vibrations, how about showing us that the vibrations actually exist?
As for the frequency response plots in the white paper, perhaps some explanation as to how they were arrived at would be in order.
The problem here is that those of us with a background in electronics see the nonsense explanations for why these things supposedly work as just that. Nonsense. It doesn't give them much credibility in my books.
And I'm not dead set against anything, but I am skeptical. I have actually made a point of not offering an opinion on this particular cable in this thread, because I've never tried one. I do, however, have a strong background in high end audio and electronics which makes my skepticism legitimate. I.E. I have auditioned a lot of high end power cables on systems with far more resolution than a bass amp (or most studio monitoring setups for that matter) and haven't found one yet that actually changed the sonic character.
bongomania
Commercial User
Nah... couple things there. One is "slippery slope argument", which is a logical fallacy. The other is that if he performed tests which gave results that didn't defy the laws of physics, and if the language used to describe the tests and results didn't defy the laws of physics, then people who understand these things might be more inclined to believe the published results. You might reasonably say that scientific types would still complain that since he produced the published results himself, that they are fabricated. An easy solution to that is to have such testing done by an independent agency that has some known credibility.
Again, no that's not true when we're talking about things that can in fact be measured by human technology. What you're saying there is true only of things that can't be measured, like "good tone" or "God".
That's a very sincere and natural approach, but it has a big flaw. Our ears will actually "hear" or "not hear" what our minds expect to hear, and the physical vibrations that are picked up by our ears are run through filters in our brains that "make sense of" those vibrations before we consciously understand what we're hearing. In other words when a person "has heard something", in total honesty and sincerity, the fact is they heard only a rough translation, not the actual objective event. A widely-discussed and acknowledged instance of this is the "powerful low B fundamental" that so many people hear from their bass cabs, when in fact what actually got projected significantly from the speaker was the first or even second harmonic, not the fundamental at all--and the listener's brain just filled in the fundamental that it expected to hear based on those harmonics. To be clear, the person's consciousness of the sound really did include the fundamental. It just wasn't really happening in the physical air hitting their ears.
The exact same thing happens with non-scientific listening tests, consistently, no matter how sincere and "honest with oneself" the listener is.
All very good and logical points. Again, I'm not arguing for the cords; I'm just arguing.
So, these outside tests....would you (or anyone on TB) have the equipment and time to perform these tests?
Of course the filter caps are part of the signal path. They are how the power supply is grounded for AC.
Paul
I would be very interested in working something out to see these tests. I would look into picking up an ESP if someone would be willing to get some charts together. I would like to find one used though 
I'll be a monkey's uncle if I'm going to spend $150 on an AC cord.
I'll be a monkey's uncle if I'm going to spend $150 on an AC cord.
I would be very interested in working something out to see these tests. I would look into picking up an ESP if someone would be willing to get some charts together. I would like to find one used though
I'll send mine to anyone willing to test it and share the test results.
Provided they send it back...
I believe it has been tried previously to prove or disprove power cables making a difference:
http://www.talkbass.com/forum/showthread.php?t=109162
Search for "Tara Labs" - those were quite a bit more $$.
IIRC, some heard a subtle difference, some did not - but I think the final tests from an engineering perspective fell through.
I also find it impossible to believe that a power cable would change anything unless compared to a junk cable. But I sure would love to see some real evidence one way or the other.
http://www.talkbass.com/forum/showthread.php?t=109162
Search for "Tara Labs" - those were quite a bit more $$.
IIRC, some heard a subtle difference, some did not - but I think the final tests from an engineering perspective fell through.
I also find it impossible to believe that a power cable would change anything unless compared to a junk cable. But I sure would love to see some real evidence one way or the other.
I think a good rule of thumb in terms of testing is that the claimant shoulders the burden of proof, because nobody else really knows what the claims are. This rule is especially useful in areas where there is some reason for a heightened level of skepticism, such as... high end audio.
Cable makers can describe their claims in coherent, objective terms. They can explain why they think that their claims are plausible, based on theory, measurement, or both. They can invite third-party tests. You'd think that a positive result from an independent controlled test would be such a boon to sales, that the makers would be rushing to get these tests done, and then to compete on the basis of their results.
One possibility that can't be overlooked is that testing will reveal an effect that is measurable using good equipment, but of a magnitude that is insufficient to generate any excitement. There is a threshold of audibility, and something has to be audible in order for me to care.
But I have my own high end power cable:
Invalid Link Removed
I bought a couple of these. They are 14 feet long. Think about how a typical 8-foot power cord is used. It's not long enough to reach an outlet, so it gets plugged into a power strip. Now you've got all sorts of additional components and connections to derange the little electrons and invite unreliability. A longer power cord eliminates all of that stuff, because it is long enough to reach an outlet by itself in most venues.
Actually, I don't clam any audio benefits, but the 14-footer is a whole lot more convenient, and I typically leave my extension cord in my car.
Cable makers can describe their claims in coherent, objective terms. They can explain why they think that their claims are plausible, based on theory, measurement, or both. They can invite third-party tests. You'd think that a positive result from an independent controlled test would be such a boon to sales, that the makers would be rushing to get these tests done, and then to compete on the basis of their results.
One possibility that can't be overlooked is that testing will reveal an effect that is measurable using good equipment, but of a magnitude that is insufficient to generate any excitement. There is a threshold of audibility, and something has to be audible in order for me to care.
But I have my own high end power cable:
Invalid Link Removed
I bought a couple of these. They are 14 feet long. Think about how a typical 8-foot power cord is used. It's not long enough to reach an outlet, so it gets plugged into a power strip. Now you've got all sorts of additional components and connections to derange the little electrons and invite unreliability. A longer power cord eliminates all of that stuff, because it is long enough to reach an outlet by itself in most venues.
Actually, I don't clam any audio benefits, but the 14-footer is a whole lot more convenient, and I typically leave my extension cord in my car.
- Apr 29, 2003
- 9,074
- 9,790
- Disclosures
- Contributor- Bass Musician Magazine | Marketing Manager- Trickfish Amplification
Without wanting to get involved in the technical side of this conversation, I reviewed the Musicord Pro for Bass Musician Magazine a little while back, and IMO I thought it sounded substantially better than any stock AC cord I had (ones that came with Mesa/Markbass/Demeter gear). I did note that the difference was somewhat subtle, but my impression was that it clearly had a positive effect on the tone and lowered the noise level of my rig. The effect was somewhat diminished live, but still noticeable, particularly in regards to the tightness/punch of the low end. So overall, yep, I'm a fan.
My testing comes from purely a practical user standpoint. I don't claim to understand electrical engineering, I test with my ears in real world environments and that works for me.
If you don't think that the ESP sounds better, I don't disagree with your experience, although I do find it surprising given that my testing was so positive. If you don't think its worth the price, than thats true for you. Hey, everyone sees and hears things differently. thats fine with me.
My testing comes from purely a practical user standpoint. I don't claim to understand electrical engineering, I test with my ears in real world environments and that works for me.
If you don't think that the ESP sounds better, I don't disagree with your experience, although I do find it surprising given that my testing was so positive. If you don't think its worth the price, than thats true for you. Hey, everyone sees and hears things differently. thats fine with me.
bongomania
Commercial User
It's interesting how every single positive test result comes from people who just plugged in and listened, with no scientific method and no claims to understanding how the equipment works.
Not to nitpick but there's a lot of contradiction here IMO. It was substantially better but subtle, but clearly made a difference on the tone?
Dan
- Apr 29, 2003
- 9,074
- 9,790
- Disclosures
- Contributor- Bass Musician Magazine | Marketing Manager- Trickfish Amplification
Yes- when I say subtle I mean that it didn't transform my rig into a different animal, when I say that it was substantial, I mean that I could clearly hear a difference, and so could all of the non-bass players ears' I like to solicit opinions from. Every else who I A/B'd for just to get a second opinion were in agreement with me that while it wasn't a "night and day" kind of difference, it was clearly an improvement.
I guess its semantics, but thats how I see it: subtle but very effective. Sorry for the confusion if that doesn't make sense.
- Apr 29, 2003
- 9,074
- 9,790
- Disclosures
- Contributor- Bass Musician Magazine | Marketing Manager- Trickfish Amplification
don't take my word for it, try one for yourself! Then this whole conversation is a moot point. You either think it works or you don't, its worth it or its not. But at least you're coming from an experiential perspective at that point.
So, let's test it.
Besides, you can't really expect everybody to have the knowledge and equipment to test it 'scientifically.' We are an aural people.
This is why I said that the scientific method can be just as 'flawed' as the listening test.
I'd love to get to the bottom of this. And I still am offering up the use of an ESP cord --or Supertanker offered his---if someone is willing to perform the tests.
How about hating both??? Sorry, but I have a hard time giving someone a free pass at BS'ing people out of their money, for the sake of stuffing their own pockets - and Vic isn't any different...
- georgestrings
- Status
