I think offering a million dollars is a great way to prove that the claim is false. He's made similar offers to debunk other claims, such as psychic ability.


http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/calling-b...ter-305549.php

James Randi Offers $1 Million If Audiophiles Can Prove $7250 Speaker Cables Are Better

Our rant about those $7,250 Pear Anjou speaker cables found its way to the James Randi Educational Foundation (JREF), and Randi offered $1 million to anyone who can prove those cables are any better than ordinary (and also overpriced) Monster Cables. Pointing out the absurd review by audiophile Dave Clark, who called the cables "danceable," Randi called it "hilarious and preposterous." He added that if the cables could do what their makers claimed, "they would be paranormal."

This is not Randi's first clash with audiophile reviewers who claim to hear differences between various pieces of exotic equipment. He promises a million dollars (which he has waiting in an account for them) if any can prove in double-blind scientific testing that their extraordinary claims are true. None have stepped up so far.

That's awesome. I've always had a hard time convincing my friends not to spend a million bucks on cables, with mixed results. When they see the prices at Monoprice, they assume that the cables must be shitty.

My god, they have no shame. They aren't even silver and there's no network or at least a ferrite core or something. At least Transparent has the decency to make something up to explain why 4 digits are necessary in the price. These are frickin' machine made!!

Audiophiles always give the excuse that the very act of doing a double blind test induces stressors into the equation that make the results unreliable.

I am from the wire is wire group and if there are such huge differences that the writers in the audio porn magazines say, they should have no problem taking that $1M from Randi. The fact that no one has speakes volumes.

I think a lot of so-called high end cables are outrageously overpriced as well. But I'm not exactly sure what Randi's challenge is. Isn't "better" sounding a subjective thing? No one could ever prove that. The only things that can be proven are specific measurements and there really is no formula that translates that to how something sounds.

Exactly why it is a hollow bet and a very lame gesture.

He should stick to UFO's and Bigfoot.

No, the person undergoing the test would have to be able to tell the difference between the cable with greater than 95% accuracy. Not decide which is better.

Sure you could. For example, get 10 audiophiles and 10 regular joes. Each listens to various pieces of music with equipment hooked up to the various cables, and rates it without knowing what they're listening to. If the more expensive cables are better sounding, they should consistently rate better (at least among the audiophiles -- and probably a bit with the regular joes as well).

Right. Anyone that pays $7250 for a cable surely msut think they are better than a cheap cable, and can hear the difference (otherwise, why do it). He's just asking them to prove they can really hear the difference. Shouldn't be hard for someone that knows they can hear it.

Exactly - if the makers of that cable won't even take the challenge, that says a lot. I personally think they should use monoprice cables for the challenge.

I disagree completely. For $7,250, speaker cables had better sound "better," not just different.

I love seeing subjective audiophilism called out. It would be even better if it was $7k speaker cables vs Home Depot speaker wire or lamp cord.

But I still don't know how you can say that it is proven. What is the standard of measurement here? So let's say you have 10 audiophiles, 10 JSP's, and 10 monkeys. The test is run, 7 audiophiles says the expensive cables sound "better", 6 JSP's say they sound better, and 9 monkeys happen to tap the button that says they sound better. What do these results mean? The majority happened to pick those cables. What's the cutoff point to say that it is "Proven"?

And let's say that the next time I run the tests, it comes out the other way around (for argument's sake, I'm assuming that they sound exactly the same and all I'm doing is getting random votes from all my participants). In theory, I could take continue to take samples until I get a "run" of votes in my favor and then stop.

I have to say, you have at least two audiophile groups. Those who purchase expensive equipment and really know their stuff, and can explain it to you.

And then you have the other "audiophile" group, which are the majority of all audiophiles, and this is the group manufacturers love to fuck around with. These guys will buy anything with a certain label on it. They love to brag about what they purchased because it's like buying an exotic car. It's also the same as a rich girl buying $5000 sweaters, when you could buy a $200 sweater and have the same quality.

Why use the one we all laugh at, Monster Cable, as the standard?

Maybe Monster Cable put up the $1 million. Good marketing scheme.

"Nobody can win the $1 million challenge that any cable at any price is better than Monster!"

That sample size is too small.

You'd probably have to have at least a few hundred comparisons for the test to be statistically valid.

This has got to be the strangest cable discussion I've ever seen.

Test comparison is a strange thing in audio. I remember many a year a go Carver "guaranteed" to one of the hi-fi magazines that he could "tweak" his amp to where the editors and audio guru's could not tell the difference between his and the highest end of Krell, Classe, etc. In the end Carver said he proved his point while the magazine (Stereophile I think) claimed something along the lines of a technicality or something. It was quite a stink for a while and very fun if "soap opera" reading with Carver refusing to advertise in the magazine any more.

It doesn't work that way. For Randi's tests, both sides have to agree on the testing strategy. There is no one person trying "test until I get the results I want".

Presumably, $7250 speaker cables are 100x better than cables you can buy at Monoprice or similar for $7.25. If that's the case the quality should be startlingly higher to most listeners, and easy to demonstrate in a double-blind study.

I think you need to look up ABX testing. It would be very easy to tell whether there was at least a difference between two cables.

Well that's just silly. Every audophile will tell you there's a law of diminishing returns on speakers and equipment. A $10,000 speaker is not twice as good as a $5k speaker. I would think most people who "say" they can hear a difference might say it's 5-10% better. For something like a cable, if there were going to be a difference it might be slightly better. A $7k cable might be considered twice as good as a $7 one (let's assume there's a difference). The audiophile world is about eeking that last 1% out of everything.

Note: I don't have a single interconnect in my setup that cost more than $15, and I care a lot about sound quality.

Fair enough. Even if it's twice as good, there should be no doubt in double blind study.

Assuming you're using people who know what to listen for I agree 100%.

You would also have to agree on what to listen to, at what volume and on what equipment.

Most would say that your not going to hear a difference regardless in certain situation. Using an HD example, most agree if you sit 10 feet away from a 19" TV you not going to see any difference between SD and HD.

Same is likely the case with subtle differences in music, equipment, cables, etc.

In addition, I think an audio set up works as a "system". With one set up you might not hear any difference. In another, a lot of difference. You could also argue that some systems are more forgiving and regardless of what you did you might not every hear any difference. Or the the system is so bad, you can't tell worse to bad.

Personally, I think the entire thing is pointless. If you the buyer "think" or "feel" there is a difference....great get it. If you the buy doesn't "think" or "feel" there is a difference, don't buy it. Why do we all have to agree on this point?

BTW in my media room I'm now 100% monoprice. In my living room I do have a mix, including some high end speaker cable (Kimber, not Monster). But I had it anyway so put it to use.

If the people don't know what to listen for, why the hell are they spending $7000 on a cable?