Pear Cable CEO Calls James Randi's $1 Million Offer a Hoax

As previously mentioned, I believe it would be pertinent to have not just one of each, but ten of each. This would eliminate the binary choice of whether one single cable was better than the other.

However, I'd rather doubt that Pear (or a challenger) would pony up $70K+ for some silly cables.
 
I'm no audio expert however I would like to add my voice to the people who are a little uneasy with this particular subject being covered so forcefully by the MDC.

To me, the purpose of the MDC is to challenge preposterous, paranormal claims which have no basis in science, and which evaporate when tested under full scientific double-blind controls.

The underlying power of the challenge lies in the *confidence* of it. No-one has won it. No-one has even passed the preliminaries. This is a strong illustrative point when trying to sell the bright viewpoint and as a result the actual test or the million dollars itself isn't really important - its the principle of the test, and the fact that its never really been in any danger because the claims of the dowsers, psychics, rainmakers or whoever are frankly ridiculous in the extreme to begin with.

This is different.

There seems to be little 'in it' for JREF, and the more I read it seems like there is little to lose for the audiophile people. Plenty of wriggle room if they fail on various technicalities, opportunities to detect subtle differences through the supplied high-end cable being marginally *worse* and if I'm honest, I'm not totally convinced that the claim for a dedicated 'audiophile' to be able to tell a difference is necessarily bogus anyway.

If - using scientific measuring equipment - there were no differences at all between the high-end cable and a cheaper one, then a claim to be able to hear the difference would indeed be extraordinary. However, as differences can be measured then theres an outside chance that an expert could distinguish *something*. And its that element of risk which makes me nervous about all this.

If they were to succeed under double-blind testing, pocketed the million and strutted their stuff in the media I suspect many of us would wonder if we had lost the million due to having witnessed a genuinely paranormal event, or a scientifically-explainable event that we should never have been challenging in the first place.

And returning to my point that the power of the challenge is the fact that no-one has succeeded, ergo paranormal ability doesn't exist, would be destroyed - even if another MDC was launched in its place.

We would always have to caveat the challenge with...'of course, someone did win it once' which removes its credibility. Fine, if someone actually stepped up to the plate and moved **** with their mind, not so fine if it were lost to some hi-fi enthusiasts who don't even claim to have any specific 'paranormal' ability.

Just my 2p. As I said before, I'm no audiophile and I'm no scientist, so I bow to the superior knowledge and expertise in this thread from everyone else. I'm just a little concerned that we are gambling a little here...
 
The audiophiles are on the edge where woo believers are created. Attacking here where scientific testing can show where reality ends and woo begins is a smart move. I am confident that the MDC is safe because Randi already knows what I have learned in the past few days.

The educational benefit of this particular challenge far outweighs any risk that JREF will loose the million. This challenge will teach the audiofiles that a proper double blind test will not only help them avoid paying for questionable products but will allow them to determine what actually does make their systems sound better. Teaching the practical use of science is what JREF is about.
 
yairhol said:
I have another problem with this test.
If Michael Fremer is the one taking the test and he needs to detect between some 'regular cable' and his '$$$ cable' (detect a difference and not which one is more pleasing since that is subjective) then what if, say the mid frequency response of the 'regular cable' is 0dB (very good) but the mid frequency response of the '$$$ cable' is +/- 2dB (worse and noticable). Michael Fremer will undoubtedly notice the audio difference coming from the two cables and precisely determine which of the two cables is currently being used.

Regards,
Yair
Click to expand...

Already said that on page one:

GzuzKryzt said:
...

Get Pear Cable to make one specific claim and challenge them on it, if enough experts have verified beforehand that a challenge on said claim is sensible.

...
Click to expand...
 
Dan O. said:
The audiophiles are on the edge where woo believers are created. Attacking here where scientific testing can show where reality ends and woo begins is a smart move. I am confident that the MDC is safe because Randi already knows what I have learned in the past few days.
Click to expand...

(my emphasis)

there seems to be a lot of talk of behind-the-scenes knowledge which is a touch frustrating - clearly, if its a no-brainer outcome then thats okay but based on the info in the public domain, I'm still skeptical that this is the case.

I'm also not entirely sure your first statement is correct. My opinion would be that the majority of 'audiophiles' are prepared to blow a big budget at their hi-fi setup and are perhaps susceptible to pseudoscientific descriptions in the quest for better and better sound systems, but I'm not sure there is any significant link between these folk and woo in the wider sense.

I can just see stormy seas ahead, unless - as I say - there is a significant detail which the great unwashed (ie. us) are unaware of at the moment!
 
I think a well defined study can be quite useful and informative.
Especially if it extends a bit beyond A&B testing. It would be nice to have a "negative" control in all runs (bell wire, or something similar). Also, I think pear should be challenged to test their Comice($410/12ft) cable and their Anjou Cable ($7250/12ft) side by side.

To me, it seems that the Anjou is simply the Comice with fancy packaging. Their site doesn't present any frequency data between these two to explain the order of magnitude increase in price.
 
Yeah y'know, this cable flap seems to be a distraction from what the JREF challange is designed to do. The CEOs point about the paranormal aspect of the challange is valid, despite Randi's willingness to bend the rules to accomadate this situation. If I were a donor I would insist that the JREF get back on track.
 
I asked the following in another thread, but that one seems to have fallen asleep, so ill do it again here:
Id like to know, would it be possible to detect any difference between those cables by technically evaluating the speaker output?
 
The claim is that nobody can hear any difference. Not that the cables are different. The claim isn't even about cables, it is about claiming that at the frequencies claimed to be "better", human hearing can not tell any difference.

A very easy thing to test.
 
Dan O. said:
The educational benefit of this particular challenge far outweighs any risk that JREF will loose the million. This challenge will teach the audiofiles that a proper double blind test will not only help them avoid paying for questionable products but will allow them to determine what actually does make their systems sound better. Teaching the practical use of science is what JREF is about.
Click to expand...

Well said.
 
Smiledriver said:
Yeah y'know, this cable flap seems to be a distraction from what the JREF challange is designed to do. The CEOs point about the paranormal aspect of the challange is valid, despite Randi's willingness to bend the rules to accomadate this situation. If I were a donor I would insist that the JREF get back on track.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The CEO himself states that he has no paranormal ability. Whilst his claims may contradict this in the opinion of Randi (and others), I think its a risky strategy to aggresively pursue their claim when there are far more people out there making wild claims (that result in a lot of anguish and people who really can't afford it being ripped off) that wouldn't stand a cat in hells chance of winning.

If there is some difference, no matter how minute, that a subject expert can genuinely detect then the MDC goes up in smoke, the JREFs credibility would be terminally dented and the skeptic 'movement' (for want of a better word) would be put back years. All for pursuing some bloke selling cables to rich people who doesn't profess to have any paranormal ability.

If theres more background info that hasn't been revealed then fine, but it seems an odd thing to stake everything on
 
Minkster said:
Exactly. The CEO himself states that he has no paranormal ability. Whilst his claims may contradict this in the opinion of Randi (and others), I think its a risky strategy to aggresively pursue their claim when there are far more people out there making wild claims (that result in a lot of anguish and people who really can't afford it being ripped off) that wouldn't stand a cat in hells chance of winning.

If there is some difference, no matter how minute, that a subject expert can genuinely detect then the MDC goes up in smoke, the JREFs credibility would be terminally dented and the skeptic 'movement' (for want of a better word) would be put back years. All for pursuing some bloke selling cables to rich people who doesn't profess to have any paranormal ability.

If theres more background info that hasn't been revealed then fine, but it seems an odd thing to stake everything on
Click to expand...
I disagree

If Pear's claims are true
1.) Audiophiles are vindicated and have a proven that extreme high end audio cables make a difference that some people can hear.
2.) Pear becomes a million dollars richer
3.) JREF gains respect for living up to the bet they made.

Indeed, JREF may even be the better for losing. Imaging future challenges of other woos. They would no longer be able to claim that the MDC is bogus or rigged or they would never pay the money anyway.

ETA: The only thing JREF would lose is the million dollars. Presuming that they were well invested and have been earning some interest all this time, they may actually be able to afford to lose the million. That might actually be a worthwhile cost to gain the credibility that you make good on your bets.
 
Last edited:
robinson said:
The claim is that nobody can hear any difference. Not that the cables are different. The claim isn't even about cables, it is about claiming that at the frequencies claimed to be "better", human hearing can not tell any difference.

A very easy thing to test.
Click to expand...

and a very easy thing to lose. There is no claim by the cable manufacturer that these cables aren't what we would call "defective"

If these are defective cables they could possibly be audibly different than adequate cables
 
pipelineaudio said:
and a very easy thing to lose. There is no claim by the cable manufacturer that these cables aren't what we would call "defective"

If these are defective cables they could possibly be audibly different than adequate cables
Click to expand...
Yes, if there is a true different in sound, what capacitance or inductance or both have the cable manufactures added to the wire to make it sound different, because all other reasons that the manufactures claim for the different in sound for their wire are nothing but snake-oil.

Paul

:) :) :)
 
joobz said:
I disagree

If Pear's claims are true
1.) Audiophiles are vindicated and have a proven that extreme high end audio cables make a difference that some people can hear.
2.) Pear becomes a million dollars richer
3.) JREF gains respect for living up to the bet they made.

Indeed, JREF may even be the better for losing. Imaging future challenges of other woos. They would no longer be able to claim that the MDC is bogus or rigged or they would never pay the money anyway.

ETA: The only thing JREF would lose is the million dollars. Presuming that they were well invested and have been earning some interest all this time, they may actually be able to afford to lose the million. That might actually be a worthwhile cost to gain the credibility that you make good on your bets.
Click to expand...

I'm pleased you think the MDC would be somehow validated by someone winning it. I think the opposite. As I said in my earlier post, its not the million dollars thats important, or the challenge itself - the power in the MDC is that its presented as something we know is never realistically in danger as paranormal claims are bogus and will never realistically be proven by science. Thats the point of it....tell a non-skeptic about the MDC and it all becomes a little clearer. Its an illustrative tool for us skeptics and allows us to (almost immediately) say 'Go on then, prove it....hey, and if you can you could win a million dollars'

By someone winning the million dollars the power of the award will largely disappear. Sure, it may still be there still but its illustrative nature wouldn't work....

"I heard some guy can dowse for water"
"Yeah, So he should take the MDC...."
"Maybe he should, someone else won it after all when they proved the paranormal"
"But he won't because its a crock. No dowser has ever beaten the preliminaries"
"Yeah, but everyone was so sure that audio stuff was rubbish. But it wasn't, was it?"
"Itwas a risky claim to take on in retrospect, unlike dowsing"
"Ahhh, but didn't Randi insist it was paranormal? So stuff like that MAY be true...."

It would be a nightmare and whilst it may show the JREF to be honourable in paying out and so on, it would remove the challenges illustrative ability, harm Randi's credibility (he couldn't be anywhere near as authoratitive after being proven wrong very publically) and generally put skeptics back years.

The same thing would happen if someone took an ESP challenge and won, however thats something so unlikely its not worth worrying about and if it did happen, it would advance science so much to be genuinely worth it.

Would science be advanced if it were shown that certain people, after years of potential 'training' could detect subtle changes in sound frequencies being piped through varying bits of cable?

And my beef with all this is that if measuring devices can detect differences, then its not beyond the realm of impossibility that some human ear may be able to pick these up. Not necessarily through any paranormal means, but just training, familiarity and an acute ear for music.

Its probably complete hogwash and I think anyone wanting to spend a fortune on a cable needs their head checking, but its just such a minor thing to risk so much on
 
Minkster said:
Would science be advanced if it were shown that certain people, after years of potential 'training' could detect subtle changes in sound frequencies being piped through varying bits of cable?
Click to expand...

Yes, it would, VERY MUCH

There is a near constant battle in the proaudio world about where to set bandwidth and dynamic range limits to be sure everything relevant (plus a little headroom) is captured.

Something like this would stand the community on its ear (hardy har har). Entire areas where things are thought to be "good enough" would have to be re-examined

not that Im holding my breath
 
circuit_bent said:
Why are the last posts suggesting things that would need to take place if JREF detected a difference?

Is it not the audiophiles with their 'golden ears' who are taking the test?
JREF made no such claims.
Click to expand...
Well, you are correct. JREF doesn’t have to do anything. I was just saying what JREF should do, or really be expected to do.
 
circuit_bent said:
I'm not sure where software comes into playing back an audio CD? If there's inaudible information on there, it's not going to play back through any system and be perceived by anybody.
Click to expand...
I don't know much about electronics or high-end audio equipment. Technology advances so fast I don’t know if there zillion dollar CD players that are actually CD-ROM drives with mini computers built in. I was just speculating on possible cheating, particularly if Pear provides their own audio equipment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom