The worlds most expensive USB cable (yes...for audiophiles)

[dannyf]

Proving intent is notoriously difficult

Precisely because of that, prosecution of fraud is so difficult. The fact that the victim is misled isn't sufficient to establish a case.

[Robomeds]

As someone who really loves high end stereo systems things like this really make me sad.  It's noise in the discussion.  Back in the 70s I think there were larger differences between equipment so getting a good amp might be audible.  Certainly speakers and room treatments mater.  However, after a point it became about making things more and more esoteric rather than better at actually playing music.  Look at the boxes the components come in.  In the 70s most of the high end stuff came in rack mount boxes.  This was likely because they were available to small manufactures and they were robust.  Now we have machined from billet aluminum panels and carved from whale bone cable covers etc.  My favorite jokes are the very fancy systems based around iPods.  Don't get me wrong, my iPod has been my source as has a laptop.  The difference is my iPod wasn't placed in a $5k milled hardwood base that was lovingly rubbed with mink oil applied with a shammy made of whale foreskin. 

With analog signals there was always some level of suspension of disbelief because, well we know that connections can degrade an analog signal, it was just a question of could you notice.  With SPIDIF we could pretend that the fact that signal values and the DA clocking was handled by the source and thus the cable could mater.  Seemed unlikely but I guess possible.  With USB, error corrected, computer data you just have to say... what total BS. 

[dannyf]

Back in the 70s I think there were larger differences between equipment so getting a good amp might be audible.

Even then, con took a different form. Think about all variations of tube vs. solid state, bjt vs. mosfet, amplifier feet, ... However, some factors people thought were unimportant turned out to be quite important: open loop linearity, OPS symmetry, global vs. local feedback, deep negative feedback vs. low/no feedback, TIM, CFB vs. VFB, active loading vs. resistive loading, etc.

There are faults on both sides: audio, like anything else, isn't exactly 100% science, nor 100% art. The "subjectivists" (aka cable guys here) are pushing this into an all art situation; and the "objectivists" (aka measurement guys) are pushing this into an all science situation.

The truth, I suspect, is somewhere in between.

[AlfBaz]

There are faults on both sides: audio, like anything else, isn't exactly 100% science...

and there, my friend, goes your last shred of credibility

[retrolefty]

The problem is that audiophiles (as well as most of us) listen to music on our equipment and music is a very subjective media and does cause emotional responses from people, people are attached to the music they love, not unlike wine connoisseur tasting wine and stating their opinion. But too often they attach qualities of the music to the equipment that it is being played on.

 As most of us know and understand the state of the art of electronics as long been reached to be faultless as far as adding or taking anything away from the signal being applied, for all practical purposes it's just wire with gain, perfect amplification. The main variable in most hi-fi system is in the speakers, their placement and room acoustics, those are areas where tweaking to personal preference is certainly worthwhile.

 But when emotion and peer pressure are coupled with high disposable income you find the some pretty absurd equipment and accessories at outstanding prices. My favorite example is 1930s vintage Western Electric 300A triode tube amplifiers being resurrected for modern consumption.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/like/261489129585?lpid=82

But maybe the great performance is because of the transformers selected?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Triad-Western-Electric-300B-2A3-Push-Pull-PP-Power-Amplifier-Output-Transformers-/261499683851?pt=Vintage_Electronics_R2&hash=item3ce298840b