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!
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!!! :)
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 !
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: ua-cam.com/video/ZyWt3kANA3Q/v-deo.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.
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.
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 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 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 $3,000 pair of audio cables make a difference. Etc. and Etc. and Etc.
I have 2500$ 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? ;)
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.
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?
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!!
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
"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.
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
@@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.
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.
@@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.
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
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 😂
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.
Having been messing with electronics for 50 years, I'm as sceptical as anyone , but I did once make up some speaker cables that I couldn't live with. They should have been pretty good - I used massive multi-strand cable that had been used to power a language laboratory running on 24 volts. So I spent some time terminating them and hooking up my Leak tube amp to my Quad ESL57s - a fairly undemanding load - apart from the quads looking like pure capacitors to the amp , but to my ears it sounded like I'd wired an incandescent lamp in series with the speakers. I went straight out and bought a reel of standard decent quality speaker cable - from an electronic component supplier and I've used that for 20 years. Sadly I no longer have access to those or similar cables to do a proper 1:1.
How the speaker sounds is not the issue, its how the cables test against other cables, and in your case how each cable you made would test against its twin. If each channel sounded the same i.e. like an incandescent lamp in the series, then it would tend to prove Ethan's point. Cables that test the same cannot sound different. But without being able to test those cables its pointless to talk about how they sounded in comparison to other untested cables. Though I would like to hear those massive cables! :)
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.
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!?
Good for you Ethan. As a Canadian C.E.T. (Certified Engineering Technologist) and musician, who Majored in Audio in College and has been an Audio/ Video enthusiast for all my life, I recently decided to set up a home recording room. While researching Microphones, A to D USB audio interfaces and other equipment I was appalled at some of the Reviews on You Tube and on the Web that were done by people with limited technical knowledge of Audio. Another famous Canadian, Floyd Toole would likely agree with you, as I do!
"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.
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.
You are a treasure Ethan! You have saved me a lot of money through the years and made me confident that my electronics are good enough, now I can focus on the music. Also, I've recorded several albums in pro studios with different bands. I definitely recognize the studio mistake you mention from time to tlme to Illustrate the placebo effect. You know where you tweak a vocal or guitar part for hours, upping the treble, adding reverb, echo or what-have-you. Finally you're satisfied. Much better! No, turns out the tweaking was done on the wrong channel on the board or the effect wasn't even turned on. Happened several times and on each occasion we were 3 to 5 people in the studio hearing massive improvements that didn't exist. It's insane that the mainstream opinion in home audio/hifi is based on pure bullshit. Walk in to a hifi shop and you're instantly harangued by a salesman claiming you need more expensive cables and that you can get more "detail" and "a bigger soundstage" with a more expensive amp.
Thanks Ethan! I remember having a hard time accepting the objective mindset when it comes to home audio at first. Especially that all competently designed hifi amps sounds the same (when operated below clipping). Being a musician and rock guitar player first I assumed that amplifiers do have have a sonic signature and a large impact (as a guitar amp has when you're actually creating the music). It didn't help that my brother, several friends and (seemingly) every mainstream audio magazine appeared to be convinced that everything from amps and cd-transports to digital cables make a profound and obvious difference. A couple of unnecessary purchases, a significant amount of money (to me) spent, a growing suspicion plus some testing later it became obvious. Everyones either deluded or full of shit. You're making everyone a great service by pushing back against the self-appointed esoteric high priests and teaching people what really matters, both in home and pro audio. I fear a lot of young people might be scared away (by the high prices and snobbish attitude of the pseudo experts that is) and less likely to pursue good sound in their living rooms, studios or musical projects if it were not for people like you. I know I almost was when starting out. Btw, I just bought your book. Looking forward to reading it. And btw a second time, I'm also a great lover of cats. We (my wife and I) just learned that our beautiful 10 year old cat lady suffers from asthma (she had a bad cough). Fortunately that's very treatable and we're giving her medicine now. And that's thanks to science and science minded vets! If we had been listening to the veterinary equivalent of audiofools we've might ended up giving our beloved kitty a homeopathic cure or some other mumbo-jumbo.
By the Ethan I've got a question for you. The main factors deciding the perceived sound of a particular headphone would be frequency response, distortion and channel matching right? Why is it that open back headphone sounds more spacious and well open than a closed backs even when the fr and distortion specs are similar? Or do they actually? Is the preference for open back headphones also entirely subjective? Or could the difference be explained by frequency response after all? Or put another way. I were to take a typical and well regarded closed back headphone like the AKG371 and eq it to the Harman target and then do the same with a good open backed hp like the Sennheiser HD600 would there be any difference or will they sound exactly the same?
I'm not a headphones expert, but my understanding is that open back types don't have strong reflections coming back to the driver cone. And the cone is not sealed in a tiny cavity. So if they sound different, then their frequency responses are in fact different. They'd have to be!
@@EthanWiner Thanks Ethan. That sounds logical. So then. If you have a headphone with low distortion that takes well to EQ it should't really matter if the design is open or not. I have a couple of really good closed backs and was thinking of buying an open set as well. But now it seems I really don't need to. You just saved me some money (which I intended to spend at a nice italian restaurant with my lady instead).
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!
@@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.
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.
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.
The first time I listened to Ethan, I criticized his assessment regarding loudspeaker measurement. I'm still not convinced that a speaker can be evaluated 100% by measurement; However, after reviewing several of his You-tube videos, I think he's the most knowledgeable, interesting and informative audio person that I've ever listened too.
Thanks Kevin. There are only four parameters that define all of audio fidelity, and I assure you that all can be measured. But a *complete* set of measurements is difficult and time consuming to do, and we never see even 1/4 of what matters published by manufacturers!
If one considers only the measurements that are published, then it's true that they do not completely characterize a speaker. But there are far more measurements which can be performed, which will give a full evaluation. The only problem is that they are extremely extensive, and not always simple to interpret with respect to the audibility of any deficiencies they expose. Then when you place the speaker into a listening room, much of the test data will change. In the end, the only test that truly matters, is whether we find them sufficiently pleasing in our own listening environment. No two speakers will sound the same, and none will ever be audibly perfect.
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.
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.
I would never spend thousands of dollars on a pair of speaker cables...but if I did, I would swear that I can hear a difference because i'm not going to admit I wasted money.
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.
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.
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.
Retired musician and electronics engineer here. Built my own system from the ground up, a continuing work of love that has spanned some five decades and began when I was in high school. Every iteration teaches me lots of stuff, gives me much pleasure and sounds absolutely wonderful without the application of any snake-oil, 10g electrical cable sounds just great! To date, the journey has led to an ST-120 amp with KT-88s, VOTT enclosures with carefully chosen inexpensive drivers, and DIY passive crossover and a Raspberry Pi/AlloBoss DAC. All built by yours truly.
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.
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
One of my main audio takeaways after enjoying this hobby for the last 20 years is that if people have to argue over where or not something even sounds different, then it's probably not worth investing lots of money into that particular item. Seems to serve me well. I'm going to go enjoy my amazon basics speaker wire and my Magnepans now. Go get him, Ethan!
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.
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.
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!
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.
A debate would be very interesting. Just a glimpse of light into a matter that is elusive to many of us. With respectful arguments and keeping an open mind this could be very instructive and revealing. I salute the initiative and I believe that having a well conducted debate could be beneficial to all parts. Much respect to both parts of the argument. We all are interested in the best representation of sound and music, and that’s what drives the passion on both parts.
If amplifiers sound different, that literally means different pressure waves were created, thus scientifically measurable. If not measurable, you got placebo'd.
@@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: ua-cam.com/video/ZyWt3kANA3Q/v-deo.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, 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?
Keep up the good work Ethan. Not so long ago there was no need to debunk the myriad of myths surrounding the audio (especially high end) industry which was once based on objectivity and the scientific method. When distortion, response and noise were no longer issues even in the most modestly priced hardware, the high end segment had to rely upon cock & bull BS in order to justify its "raison d'etre". Those engaging in this type of activity might well be described as "audio whores" who, rather than educating, instead choose to exploit the underinformed. Well I guess the economy needs its sheep and those taking advantage of them would've made Jordan Belfort proud.
Total respect to Ethan , as a Brit I have a bit of a radar against people like that man from PS audio. UA-cam constantly draws me in to PS audio videos, but is suspect that might have something to do with SEO and PS audio chucking money at google. Whilst it is clearly difficult to measure the subjective qualities of a painting, measuring pieces of wire is a different matter. Thank you sir for waving the flag of common scientific sense
@@TA-nn9os Agree, anything not to be accountable for statements. I use the power cable as the most simple example. If there's a difference he should prove it. Any way he can.
@Frank Winkhorst You have a faulty Mexican cable. We need to clarify something too. There are limits. You may need to pay say $20 for a cable ensuring it's parts and manufacture is of 'adequate' quality to meet specification required. What isn't justified is claiming the interconnect needs to cost $1000. It's simple. Don't buy crap, buy a sensible justified decent cable (e.g. Canare cable and connectors $30), don't be a victim of audiophool b/s and pay for someones Mercedes.
Dear Ethan, I thought Amir at ASR was my favourite UA-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.
@@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.
I think Paul will say that wires have difference, because people could hear it, but also i think that this difference is not in wires it's in the mood or fellings of people. Good luck Ethan!
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.
There are many Audiophiles who claim to be able to hear differences in equipment when in theory none should exist. These people also seem to be afraid of properly executed blind tests, claiming that they are invalid for some reason or another. Alan Shaw who is the MD of Harbeth Loudspeakershas offered a pair of his top of the line M40.2 speakers for anybody who consistently can tell apart 2 competently designed amplifiers that are working within their design specs. Obviously this excludes what he calls"boutique" valve amps which introduce their own sound signature. As yet there have been no takers.
![If you can't hear this then you're not an audiophile [See description for link to followup video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/48PxwspDvrE/mqdefault.jpg)
![If you can't hear this then you're not an audiophile [See description for link to followup video]](/img/tr.png)
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.
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 !
I watched about 8 PS audio videos before I got to the snake oil one.
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 !
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:
ua-cam.com/video/ZyWt3kANA3Q/v-deo.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.
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.
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 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
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.
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 really hoping that when I opened this the full title would read, “Ethan Winer challenges Paul McCartney to a duel.”
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.
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?! : ua-cam.com/video/GTwwvY8Is1o/v-deo.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?
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!!
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.
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.
YES!!!!! Timbre part makes me happy. You are the best!
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.
I'm sure McGowan knows he's selling snake-oil, but money has a curious way of destroying our decency.
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.
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:
ua-cam.com/video/Zvireu2SGZM/v-deo.html
I dont think Paul wants you outing him and his fancy, audiophile, $1000 interconnects... that "sound" the same as $20 interconnects from amazon.
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 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.
My spouse and I are now separated... and it started with a debate : ) Good luck!
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.
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
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!
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!
"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.
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
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.
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.
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.
It’s the hi-fi, audiofool crowd… headphone cable is another one..
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
LOVE THIS. How can we, the UA-cam audience, help to make this happen? It needs to happen.
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 😂
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.
Having been messing with electronics for 50 years, I'm as sceptical as anyone , but I did once make up some speaker cables that I couldn't live with.
They should have been pretty good - I used massive multi-strand cable that had been used to power a language laboratory running on 24 volts. So I spent some time terminating them and hooking up my Leak tube amp to my Quad ESL57s - a fairly undemanding load - apart from the quads looking like pure capacitors to the amp , but to my ears it sounded like I'd wired an incandescent lamp in series with the speakers.
I went straight out and bought a reel of standard decent quality speaker cable - from an electronic component supplier and I've used that for 20 years.
Sadly I no longer have access to those or similar cables to do a proper 1:1.
How the speaker sounds is not the issue, its how the cables test against other cables, and in your case how each cable you made would test against its twin. If each channel sounded the same i.e. like an incandescent lamp in the series, then it would tend to prove Ethan's point. Cables that test the same cannot sound different. But without being able to test those cables its pointless to talk about how they sounded in comparison to other untested cables. Though I would like to hear those massive cables! :)
You're only wrong on one thing in this video, Paul really doesn't mean well.
Yeah, good point.
When ps audio started selling the noise harvester, I switched off
Thanks, Mr. Winer, for your informative and learned views. Always fun to rattle the tubes of tweaks.
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.
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.
Good for you Ethan. As a Canadian C.E.T. (Certified Engineering Technologist) and musician, who Majored in Audio in College and has been an Audio/ Video enthusiast for all my life, I recently decided to set up a home recording room. While researching Microphones, A to D USB audio interfaces and other equipment I was appalled at some of the Reviews on You Tube and on the Web that were done by people with limited technical knowledge of Audio. Another famous Canadian, Floyd Toole would likely agree with you, as I do!
He's (Paul) not going to publicly debate this issue.
You don't bother to debate with fools.
@@RandyShirley
Paul is the fool.
"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.
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.
You are a treasure Ethan! You have saved me a lot of money through the years and made me confident that my electronics are good enough, now I can focus on the music. Also, I've recorded several albums in pro studios with different bands. I definitely recognize the studio mistake you mention from time to tlme to Illustrate the placebo effect. You know where you tweak a vocal or guitar part for hours, upping the treble, adding reverb, echo or what-have-you. Finally you're satisfied. Much better! No, turns out the tweaking was done on the wrong channel on the board or the effect wasn't even turned on. Happened several times and on each occasion we were 3 to 5 people in the studio hearing massive improvements that didn't exist. It's insane that the mainstream opinion in home audio/hifi is based on pure bullshit. Walk in to a hifi shop and you're instantly harangued by a salesman claiming you need more expensive cables and that you can get more "detail" and "a bigger soundstage" with a more expensive amp.
Thanks for the nice note, Felix.
Thanks Ethan! I remember having a hard time accepting the objective mindset when it comes to home audio at first. Especially that all competently designed hifi amps sounds the same (when operated below clipping). Being a musician and rock guitar player first I assumed that amplifiers do have have a sonic signature and a large impact (as a guitar amp has when you're actually creating the music). It didn't help that my brother, several friends and (seemingly) every mainstream audio magazine appeared to be convinced that everything from amps and cd-transports to digital cables make a profound and obvious difference. A couple of unnecessary purchases, a significant amount of money (to me) spent, a growing suspicion plus some testing later it became obvious. Everyones either deluded or full of shit. You're making everyone a great service by pushing back against the self-appointed esoteric high priests and teaching people what really matters, both in home and pro audio. I fear a lot of young people might be scared away (by the high prices and snobbish attitude of the pseudo experts that is) and less likely to pursue good sound in their living rooms, studios or musical projects if it were not for people like you. I know I almost was when starting out. Btw, I just bought your book. Looking forward to reading it. And btw a second time, I'm also a great lover of cats. We (my wife and I) just learned that our beautiful 10 year old cat lady suffers from asthma (she had a bad cough). Fortunately that's very treatable and we're giving her medicine now. And that's thanks to science and science minded vets! If we had been listening to the veterinary equivalent of audiofools we've might ended up giving our beloved kitty a homeopathic cure or some other mumbo-jumbo.
By the Ethan I've got a question for you. The main factors deciding the perceived sound of a particular headphone would be frequency response, distortion and channel matching right? Why is it that open back headphone sounds more spacious and well open than a closed backs even when the fr and distortion specs are similar? Or do they actually? Is the preference for open back headphones also entirely subjective? Or could the difference be explained by frequency response after all? Or put another way. I were to take a typical and well regarded closed back headphone like the AKG371 and eq it to the Harman target and then do the same with a good open backed hp like the Sennheiser HD600 would there be any difference or will they sound exactly the same?
I'm not a headphones expert, but my understanding is that open back types don't have strong reflections coming back to the driver cone. And the cone is not sealed in a tiny cavity. So if they sound different, then their frequency responses are in fact different. They'd have to be!
@@EthanWiner Thanks Ethan. That sounds logical. So then. If you have a headphone with low distortion that takes well to EQ it should't really matter if the design is open or not. I have a couple of really good closed backs and was thinking of buying an open set as well. But now it seems I really don't need to. You just saved me some money (which I intended to spend at a nice italian restaurant with my lady instead).
Thx for the great work and videos!!. i will follow your channel from now on.
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!
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.
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?!
Haha Ethan, Paul won't entertain debates. You may enjoy this one: ua-cam.com/video/katmUM-Xelw/v-deo.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.
The first time I listened to Ethan, I criticized his assessment regarding loudspeaker measurement. I'm still not convinced that a speaker can be evaluated 100% by measurement; However, after reviewing several of his You-tube videos, I think he's the most knowledgeable, interesting and informative audio person that I've ever listened too.
Thanks Kevin. There are only four parameters that define all of audio fidelity, and I assure you that all can be measured. But a *complete* set of measurements is difficult and time consuming to do, and we never see even 1/4 of what matters published by manufacturers!
If one considers only the measurements that are published, then it's true that they do not completely characterize a speaker. But there are far more measurements which can be performed, which will give a full evaluation. The only problem is that they are extremely extensive, and not always simple to interpret with respect to the audibility of any deficiencies they expose.
Then when you place the speaker into a listening room, much of the test data will change. In the end, the only test that truly matters, is whether we find them sufficiently pleasing in our own listening environment. No two speakers will sound the same, and none will ever be audibly perfect.
Everything you can hear can be measured but you can't hear everything which can be measured - case closed
If an electrical signal is what drives a loudspeaker, then any change in its sound is absolutely measurable. It's physics and irrefutable.
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 laughed out loud really loud when I heard Winer say what the premise of this was...love it
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.
Are those speakers on the background next to your monitors the Rolands ma8>? 😎
Yes, they're petty good for $100 computer speakers.
I would never spend thousands of dollars on a pair of speaker cables...but if I did, I would swear that I can hear a difference because i'm not going to admit I wasted money.
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.
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!
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.
Retired musician and electronics engineer here. Built my own system from the ground up, a continuing work of love that has spanned some five decades and began when I was in high school. Every iteration teaches me lots of stuff, gives me much pleasure and sounds absolutely wonderful without the application of any snake-oil, 10g electrical cable sounds just great! To date, the journey has led to an ST-120 amp with KT-88s, VOTT enclosures with carefully chosen inexpensive drivers, and DIY passive crossover and a Raspberry Pi/AlloBoss DAC. All built by yours truly.
Excellent, thanks for sharing.
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.
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
One of my main audio takeaways after enjoying this hobby for the last 20 years is that if people have to argue over where or not something even sounds different, then it's probably not worth investing lots of money into that particular item. Seems to serve me well. I'm going to go enjoy my amazon basics speaker wire and my Magnepans now. Go get him, Ethan!
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!
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.
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.
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.
If only humans were as logical, linear and objective as electric signals :-)
Since you can't know an electron's velocity and speed at same time...
Anyone else ever notice that Paul's questions are all in the exact same envelopes? Good question! LOL
Like Carnac The Magnificent!
A debate would be very interesting. Just a glimpse of light into a matter that is elusive to many of us. With respectful arguments and keeping an open mind this could be very instructive and revealing. I salute the initiative and I believe that having a well conducted debate could be beneficial to all parts.
Much respect to both parts of the argument. We all are interested in the best representation of sound and music, and that’s what drives the passion on both parts.
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.
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.
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:
ua-cam.com/video/ZyWt3kANA3Q/v-deo.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, 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?
I want Ethan, Paul, Danny Richie, and Amir from Audio Science Resesrch all locked into an escape room. That would be hilarious to watch.
Ladies put your handbags down 😂
You have my full support!!
Keep up the good work Ethan. Not so long ago there was no need to debunk the myriad of myths surrounding the audio (especially high end) industry which was once based on objectivity and the scientific method. When distortion, response and noise were no longer issues even in the most modestly priced hardware, the high end segment had to rely upon cock & bull BS in order to justify its "raison d'etre". Those engaging in this type of activity might well be described as "audio whores" who, rather than educating, instead choose to exploit the underinformed. Well I guess the economy needs its sheep and those taking advantage of them would've made Jordan Belfort proud.
I could not agree more with everything you said!
Total respect to Ethan , as a Brit I have a bit of a radar against people like that man from PS audio. UA-cam constantly draws me in to PS audio videos, but is suspect that might have something to do with SEO and PS audio chucking money at google. Whilst it is clearly difficult to measure the subjective qualities of a painting, measuring pieces of wire is a different matter. Thank you sir for waving the flag of common scientific sense
Agreed on all counts, thanks.
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?
Paul should be able to blind identify his products apart from others. Let's see it happen. Even just the power cables..........lol
@@TA-nn9os Agree, anything not to be accountable for statements. I use the power cable as the most simple example. If there's a difference he should prove it. Any way he can.
@@TA-nn9os So basically he says that you can't measure the difference AND you can't hear the difference 😂
@Frank Winkhorst But thats not the case.
@Frank Winkhorst You have a faulty Mexican cable.
We need to clarify something too. There are limits. You may need to pay say $20 for a cable ensuring it's parts and manufacture is of 'adequate' quality to meet specification required. What isn't justified is claiming the interconnect needs to cost $1000. It's simple. Don't buy crap, buy a sensible justified decent cable (e.g. Canare cable and connectors $30), don't be a victim of audiophool b/s and pay for someones Mercedes.
In your dreams...😂
Hey Ethan, i see this posting, INSTANT SUBSCRIBER!👍
Dear Ethan, I thought Amir at ASR was my favourite UA-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.
You go, Ethan!
Paul panders to money, not science
That was the video that made me unsubscribe from Paul's channel. I see I wasn't the only one who had a problem with it.
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.
I think Paul will say that wires have difference, because people could hear it, but also i think that this difference is not in wires it's in the mood or fellings of people. Good luck Ethan!
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.
There are many Audiophiles who claim to be able to hear differences in equipment when in theory none should exist. These people also seem to be afraid of properly executed blind tests, claiming that they are invalid for some reason or another. Alan Shaw who is the MD of Harbeth Loudspeakershas offered a pair of his top of the line M40.2 speakers for anybody who consistently can tell apart 2 competently designed amplifiers that are working within their design specs. Obviously this excludes what he calls"boutique" valve amps which introduce their own sound signature. As yet there have been no takers.
A debate would be very interesting to say the least 👍🏼