You can’t say definitively one way or the other not knowing the components and set up (ie noisy mains and other interference) of the individual systems where the cables were tested. Absent a control group you can’t say much about these tests.
1 Like
That’s because BJ cables have become the subject of this thread so that is what people have rushed out to buy. So I agree, although for different reasons, that it is not random.
1 Like
So far we only have anecdotal evidence, and that some people have preferred a cable costing one or more orders of magnitude less than the ‘boutique audiophile’ cables shows that it’s not universally the case that vastly more expensive cables are always better.
We don’t have anywhere near enough contributions to determine the ‘average’ position, nor do we have the randomisation that would be required to establish a statistically significant result.
2 Likes
A blind test is the only true way to compare when you are at price extremes like we are here. Now that would be interesting. 
2 Likes
The same test with the same cables would also have to be done with dozens of different systems.
hi Marko
Yes, in any one system with any one cable I totally agree with you and and with Xanthe that any result can occur.
I have said that several times on this thread.
That’s because the effect on SQ is about noise and it’s impossible to design a cable that takes account of the noise in every system.
But all that means is that specific results are unpredictable.
It doesn’t mean that on average all cables are equally good.
That’s why I designed that thought experiment to control for those odd results and find the overall pattern, if there is a pattern - i.e. by controlling for system by having 100 systems and to control for listeners preferences by having a 1000 listeners.
Then if there is a general effect it will emerge.
1 Like
I do have a use for vodka, it’s very good for cleaning skin where I’m going to be applying an HRT patch!
Yes, that’s why I said the same test should be done in 100 very good home hifi systems.
That’s in the question I asked.
I think it looks as though we may have misunderstood each other and in fact we’re actually having a heated agreement! 
Yes, again I totally agree.
That’s why I specified that the tests must be blind and that the listeners must not even know it’s a cable test in my original Q.
Really?
Yes really!
I put one 0.5 metre BJC cable between the PC and the Cisco 2960 switch. The other, 1 metre, BJC cable is from the Cisco to the NDX. I moved my Audioquest Cinnamon to go between the Cisco and the rest of the network.
First impressions, listening this evening - absolutely day and day. Same day, same time of day. No difference whatever. Much like when I put the Cinnamon in ages ago. Sounds just the same.
One difference that I have noticed - but I need to test this some more - is that copying files from one PC to the music PC (so that is through the Cinnamon cable) is incredibly slow. I mean really slow. I shall try again tomorrow to see whether this is how it is with that cable, or whether it was just a glitch.
So - not impressed so far.
3 Likes
FWIW whenever I am testing stuff I include my missus. She has better hearing than me (women’s hearing is superior to men’s anyway), and she has no knowledge of what bits do what. When testing mains cables she was not only able to pick the best but spotted my attempt at subterfuge - all of this she did unsighted.
If you want assistance with choosing hifi ask a women.
1 Like
Let me try a different approach.
HH prefers BJC to Vodka
STate prefers Vodka to BJC
Where is the variability in these results in your opinion?
Well, I’m. I Not on about the alcohol drink. Does this require a test also…?
What do YOU reckon?
Absolutely right! 
“Directionality can make some sense for analogue cables; however for digital cables the only way it makes sense is in terms of a slightly different tuning of the RF stub.”
Well… “digital signals” are nothing more than analogue signals represented in the analogue domain!
Absolutely
However, with an analogue connection, the quality of the connection directly affects the sound created as the noise etc is inherently mixed in with the sound signal and is inseparable from it.
On the other hand the effect of noise on a digital connection is indirect, e.g. the noise doesn’t affect the data representing the sound signal, those data are faithfully passed on to the DAC, but the noise mixes into other parts (such as the power rails and the subsequent analogue stages after the DAC).
Different principles, mechanisms and effects, and hence different relationships to components.
Exactly, at some point, one has to stop and see the beauty of the forest, rather than focusing on the bark on the trees. Otherwise the experience is fatiguing rather than enjoying.