User Manual

CABLE THEORY

Page 26

glasses and yet still see that the sky is blue. If we use yellow goggles while skiing on a cloudy day,

when we take them off the snow looks purple. The “solution” isn’t to get out the yellow paint to x the

snow, the solution is to allow ourselves time to re-calibrate our references. Once we have adjusted to

a colored (distorted) reference, we can be fooled into thinking reality is wrong.

Have you ever been given a cassette tape and you didn’t know if it was Dolby encoded or not? You

probably pushed the Dolby button on and off, while you were playing the tape, in an attempt to decide

which way was correct. Odds are that both positions sounded wrong. One way sounded too bright

and the other sounded too dull. In this articial context one is faced with two conicting references,

both of which make the other sound wrong. A common response is to wish there were a middle posi-

tion, even though one of the existing positions is absolutely correct and the other is absolutely wrong.

This is an example of how an instant comparison can be a highly deceptive selling technique and not

part of a trustworthy evaluation methodology.

Whoever controls the switch can sell whatever they want. This also applies to a lone individual doing

an “evaluation” by themselves. Just because a second party isn’t involved doesn’t prevent someone

from “selling” themselves whichever component rst grabs their attention, whichever one got the good

review, whichever one has an attractive story.

• Another simple opportunity for deception (including self-deception) is the A/B phenomenon: The sec-

ond time a piece of music is played, the listener is bound to notice something that wasn’t noticed the

rst time-even with familiar music. This perception feeds directly into the value system which dictates

that more information is our most commanding priority. If you want to sell something, always play it

second.

There are ways around this pitfall: Go back to “A”. No matter which is better, going back to “A” will be

a surprise. Since the step from “A” to “B” included the “novelty factor” in addition to the real difference,

the step back to “A” will be surprisingly different from the original step to “B”, simply because the nov-

elty factor has disappeared. “A” will seem to be better than when played the rst time. Continuing on

to play “B” a second time, without the benet of the novelty factor, then reveals its truer relationship to

“A”. After an initial A/B/A/B, it is possible to move to “C” and “D” with far less confusion.

• It can be easier to evaluate three products instead of the apparently simpler task of evaluating only

two. Even without the deception of an instant A/B, any A/B is subject to a certain amount of the effect

described with the cassette tape example-the truth is perceived as somewhere between the two.

If two of the three products are relatively similar, probably (but not always) different models from the

same manufacturer, then it is quite easy to establish an absolute hierarchy between the two products.

When a third and different product is compared to a similar pair, it becomes a comparison between a

line and a point, instead of just between two points. It becomes much easier to establish a hierarchy:

that the third product is preferable to either member of the pair, inferior to either, or somewhere in-be-

tween.

• There is almost no way back to the “garden” of complete innocence. It requires great awareness and

careful methodology to attain anything like the direct vision available to those who cannot be dis-

tracted by misleading details. This view ies in the face of those who declare that people have to learn

what is good sound, go to lots of live concerts and study the technology. Bull!