Only $2,000 to improve your amp's performance

[BassyBill]

Wait - explain, please. You tried the cord in the left monitor and then the right, and in each case it resulted in "a widening of the stereo field" for the monitor it was connected to? I'm confused here.

I'll read the rest of the thread before posting further.

 

[Steveaux]

In Steveaux's defense, I agree with him. He isn't assuming only based on another company's actions (Dr. Bass)... he is making the connection because this cord company doesn't back up their claims with hard data. That alone makes me pause for caution when considering whether I trust them with my money or not. If they lie about what their products do, how much of a stretch is it to consider that they would not honor their return policy?

Thanks.

I'm not in this for word games or jousting. I get more than enough at work.

For me, it's a simple matter of factual data ... or, the lack thereof.

 

[Limeman]

Thanks.

I'm not in this for word games or jousting. I get more than enough at work.

For me, it's a simple matter of factual data ... or, the lack thereof.

Got that. Then email the company and request factual data. See if they respond. In the meantime, check in with the BBB to see if they have complaints in regards to their customer service/refunds.

 

[BassyBill]

Wait - explain, please. You tried the cord in the left monitor and then the right, and in each case it resulted in "a widening of the stereo field" for the monitor it was connected to? I'm confused here.

I'll read the rest of the thread before posting further.

Okay, I just read the rest of the thread.

Ahem...

Clarification of the above, please?

 

[BassyBill]

The company need have no worries about losing out on their returns policy. If they fleece 10 gullible folks for the sort of profit margin they're working to (that's what they're all about, imo) and have to make a couple of refunds to people who get a reality check at some later point, then someone is still chuckling all the way to the bank.

 

[lomo]

Got that. Then email the company and request factual data. See if they respond. In the meantime, check in with the BBB to see if they have complaints in regards to their customer service/refunds.

They're probably fine with refunds. Virtually all buyers likely believe it works and keep them.

On another note-here's a bit of medical history illustrating the need for blinded studies:
In the mid-20th century, the operation of choice for chest pain felt to be from narrowing of the coronary arteries was a procedure wherein the internal mammary artery was intentionally "tied off" (=surgically blocked). Some guy explained in theory why he felt it "logical" and it caught on. The word on the street was that patients felt better and surgeons felt it worked. At one point an investigator decided to do a single blind test. Half the patients had their internal mammary arteries (just under the breast bone and BTW having absolutely zero to do with cardiac circulation) tied and the others had anesthesia but just a superficial cut and stitches. Initially, the same number in both groups felt subjectively better, but follow-up showed at 1 year that there was no difference in pain or incidence of cardiac death between the 2 groups. A similar scene was repeated in the 70s. At that time if you had cardiac chest pain and a narrowed coronary, you got a bypass. Everybody in the medical community thought it was logical and worked. Most patients seemed to feel better. However, in the 80s a large prospective randomized trial proved that unless the main coronary artery was narrowed by at least 70%, or there was significant (>50%) narrowing in both the right and left coronary circuits, the incidence of cardiac death was higher in those operated on than those treated only with medication-thereafter the criteria for surgery became streamlined. Sadly, much of modern medicine has still not been adequately tested and is still based on "what experts think".

Sorry for the long post, but these are good examples of people (both Drs and patients) not really knowing what was happening due to inevitable bias. They trusted what they felt (heard?) but only a blind test showed the big picture.

 

[Steveaux]

The company need have no worries about losing out on their returns policy. I they fleece 10 gullible folks for the sort of profit margin thye're working to and have to make a couple of refunds, they're still chuckling all the way to the bank.

Sadly, that's how I saw it as well.

 

[RHFusillo]

http://www.talkbass.com/forum/showthread.php?t=533082&highlight=essential+sound+products

I actually bought a ESP MusicCord last year, just to try it. My test was completely unscientific (me, my ears, and a decent bass rig -- my testing was not blind). I heard absolutely no difference between the ESP cord and the one that came stock with my AI Focus.

(I have a Ph.D. in engineering, but it's not a branch of engineering that would be useful in the technical discussion here.)

I returned the MusicCord for a MusicCord Pro. Same thing -- I heard absolutely no difference between it and the stock power cord.

The proprietor of ESP was cooperative and gave me no problem about accepting the returns of both of the cords. My conclusion: the ESP product will not improve my sound.

 

[Rockbobmel]

We went over this "snake oil" stuff at the Klipsch Forums. Those guys have a lot of fun with these claims- especially speaker wires.
I remember one ad for some stupid "amazing little clock" that made his $50,000 systed "come to life!!"
If I had a $50,000 system, it had better already came to life, cook me breakfast, clean the house, mow the lawn and pay the bills!!, etc, etc,etc...............

 

[fdeck]

This is a test to determine whether any humans can hear a difference, not whether or not there is a difference.

I don't believe you'll see any difference on a scope/analyzer - and you can see things on a scope/analyzer that are orders of magnitude below what any humans are capable of hearing.

The ABX blind testing is just a good way of showing people that when you take away sight, your golden ears get a lot less golden.

The main purpose for blind testing is to identify the audibility of effects that are already known to be measurable. For instance it can be used to determine thresholds of audibility for effects such as distortion and lossy data compression. A lot of what we know about hearing is due to blind testing in a research setting. For instance, I suspect that the Fletcher-Munson curves were determined in this way. A lot of blind testing can now be done with just a computer, as the test signals can be generated digitally.

The current proposal on the table is to use blind testing to settle a controversy over an effect that is not known to be measurable. To make blind testing work, the cable has to be the only difference under test. Adding a speaker, microphone, and acoustical environment simply raises the risk that other artifacts will creep into the recordings, such as room noises or the length of dead air at the start of each sample. If it isn't all done just right, nothing will be learned. At best, any result is only likely to be regarded as a preliminary step towards additional corroborative testing.

This is why I'm not hanging my hat on blind testing to settle this issue.

 

[aborgman]

The main purpose for blind testing is to identify the audibility of effects that are already known to be measurable. For instance it can be used to determine thresholds of audibility for effects such as distortion and lossy data compression. A lot of what we know about hearing is due to blind testing in a research setting. For instance, I suspect that the Fletcher-Munson curves were determined in this way. A lot of blind testing can now be done with just a computer, as the test signals can be generated digitally.

The current proposal on the table is to use blind testing to settle a controversy over an effect that is not known to be measurable. To make blind testing work, the cable has to be the only difference under test. Adding a speaker, microphone, and acoustical environment simply raises the risk that other artifacts will creep into the recordings, such as room noises or the length of dead air at the start of each sample. If it isn't all done just right, nothing will be learned. At best, any result is only likely to be regarded as a preliminary step towards additional corroborative testing.

This is why I'm not hanging my hat on blind testing to settle this issue.

I agree -

...but given everything the same, other than power cord - the results should be pretty good. With the available software blind ABX isn't that hard.

That being said - even if blind listening tests showed a difference, you'd have to show me differences on a scope/analyzer before I'd believe they were because of the power cord.

Heck, even if you showed me differences on a scope/analyzer, you'd have to show me how they were getting in there before I'd believe they were because of the power cord.

Let's just say I'm a touch skeptical about the sonic difference caused by 15 cents worth of copper fashioned slightly differently and being used to carry AC mains current.

 

[Limeman]

Okay, I just read the rest of the thread.

Ahem...

Clarification of the above, please?

Sorry... been really busy last couple of days. So to restate: this was in no way a serious listening test. Just a quick trial to see if we thought there was any change in the sound via the Myers HD-1 monitors and if it was even worth our time to try more in-depth testing. We listened to 2 tracks we're familiar with; Upper Structure - Making the Saint, and Marcus Miller - Blast.

First time through we gave a listen with both Myers connected to the standard power cords and listened to the Upper Structure track. I then quickly swapped in the MusicCord Pro for the right monitor, left the standard power cord in the left, and we listened again. Then we swapped the MusicCord to the left Myer and the normal power cord back to the right, and listened again. Once that was done, we put on Blast and listened with the sub, then attached the MusicCord Pro to the sub and listened to the track one more time. Comments were held to a minimum until the short bit of listening was done.

I don't want to go into details again of our initial impressions other than to say there honestly appeared to be a difference with both the Myers and the sub with the MusicCord Pro. It sparked our interest enough to want to try to do an honest listening test this coming Friday evening. That's it. I've gotten a good amount of advice from many here (as well as some serious flogging) to help us run at least a rudimentary test. I don't plan to change anyone's mind here, just doing this for myself and have been willing to be assaulted and disparaged by those more worthy, merely to share what I find.

 

[seamonkey]

The assertion that the conductors in power cables vibrate with alternating current passing through them piqued my interest.
...

If this effect were true you might expect high power transmission lines would be vibrating. the earth being a big magnet, you expect these kila volt lines to be showing signs of vibration.

Some good solid tests would be great to see but I doubt it would ever convince that who claim to hear with just their ears a difference.

Same people who wear glassses, and don't have the need to super hearing that would have meant the difference between survival and getting eaten not too long ago in relative human term. Or they might have correlated sacrifcing a goat to a plentify havest.

i don't know why some think sciense is out to prove them wrong, it may prove them right There may be some people with golden hearing. Science would prove that.

Good luck with the test. You may get reproducible result bu still only a small percentage of credibility of clear marketing ads.

 

[Jason P Bass]

It sparked our interest enough to want to try to do an honest listening test this coming Friday evening. That's it. I've gotten a good amount of advice from many here (as well as some serious flogging) to help us run at least a rudimentary test. I don't plan to change anyone's mind here, just doing this for myself and have been willing to be assaulted and disparaged by those more worthy, merely to share what I find.

Good luck. Glad to hear someone is interested in conducting the test.

Please remember, at all times, that here on Talkbass there will be two issues to get through. 1) Does this test demonstrate the placebo effect or is it a legitimate test of the power cord variable? 2) Does the power cord variable have any detectable result?

Please be super-ultra-crazy-paranoid about getting #1 right. I would recommend, when you're done with the test, posting your full test procedure (without results) and let people pick it apart. Answer all the critics. After a few days, when that has been beaten to death, post the results.

I look forward to scrutinizing.

 

[SMASH]

Some good solid tests would be great to see but I doubt it would ever convince that who claim to hear with just their ears a difference.

Lots of good repeatable tests have been done, and there's always Randi's $1m prize too which always provide so much amusement when the True Believers try to rationalize why they, or no one else, has claimed it.

Thing is, a different shyster puts a new logo on the same old BS/fraud and the True Believers are newly enabled. People *want* to delude themselves. Witness casinos, elections, goofy diet schemes, etc.

 

[Geddyfleaharris]

honestly appeared to be a difference

I think the point being that for $800 there better not "appear" to be a difference - The differnce should be "sweet jesus - how did I live without this cable before."

Just my opinion.

Tests are always fun so have fun with that anyways.

 

[Awesomenaut]

I think my favorite part of all of these arguments is that, let us say hypothetically there is an incremental gain in fidelity by using these cables or any other magic cable that improves tone, you're then going to shove that awesome tone into a cab that's wired with doorbell wire, blast it out into a brick oddly shaped room for a bunch of drunks to hear.

OR maybe you'll mic that doorbell wire packed cab and send that awesome tone down a cable into a mic pre or amplifier that isn't powered by or fed with magic cable, mix it in pro-tools ran by a computer with no magic cable and press it on to a CD to sell to drunks in bars, who well then turn around and listen to it in their Hyundai with the $200 Kenwood stereo.

I read a bit of one of Fremer's articles where he likened a "filtering" cable to using a Brita filter at your house. The water is dirty until you filter it, just like the power, right? Well the continuation of that analogy would be to filter the water at home, drive out to the reservoir, dump that water back in and then go home and drink it out of a dirty glass...right?

 

[seamonkey]

Lots of good repeatable tests have been done, and there's always Randi's $1m prize too which always provide so much amusement when the True Believers try to rationalize why they, or no one else, has claimed it.

Thing is, a different shyster puts a new logo on the same old BS/fraud and the True Believers are newly enabled. People *want* to delude themselves. Witness casinos, elections, goofy diet schemes, etc.

I couldn't find the Amazing Randi's $1m for power cables? Unless it's considered paranormal - which it would have to be.

But when I visited the site I got sick to my stomach reading about the dousing rods being manufactured to find land mines. And governments actually buying them - US included.

All I can say is thank gawd for the internet in getting the truth out on the many scams - from the harmless to the harmful. Cables are way down at the bottom of the scam list compared to what else is out there.

 

[fdeck]

IIRC Randi pulled the prize because it distracted from more interesting and important issues.

 

[wvbass]

I'm way late to the party here, and I have not read the entire thread, although I made it through a lot of this. I kind of wonder if Limeman is just seeing how long he can keep this thread going.

But, has anybody actually looked at the Musiccord "how it works" page - [Invalid or Expired Link Removed]?

Aside from the fact that they can't spell "frequency," the key to the Musiccord's success seems to be that it is a multistrand cable instead of a single conductor. According to them this helps with "elimination of phase distortion," and it helps to "retain the speed and increase current capacity." (As a side thought, can anyone explain what speed they are retaining? I don't understand that reference.)

Nay-sayers and true believers, assume for a moment that these claims are 100% true and that this has a noticeable and measurable effect on an audio device using this type of cable.

In fact, the MusicCord description seems to imply that more, smaller conductors working in unison is better. I always believed this to be true, since I thought electrons moved along the surface and multistrand cable has more surface area. (Is this correct?). The MusicCord cable uses 4 20gauge wires per conductor

The trouble is, I don't think I've ever seen a power cable that isn't made of multistrand wire. Have any of you? Even the cheapest computer cable is multistrand. I'm pretty sure my cheap computer power cable uses even more, even smaller gauge wires per conductor.

By MusicCords own claims, doesn't that make my cheap power cord better than their expensive one?