Last week, magician and paranormal debunker James Randi (pictured above left) offered the makers of Pear speaker cables $1 million if they could prove in double-blind testing there was a difference between their $7,250 cables and ordinary Monster Cables. Now, Adam Blake (pictured above right), CEO and co-founder of Pear Cable, has called Randi's offer "a fake" and a "joke". We've contacted James Randi, asking if he'd like to get together with these Pear dudes for some double-blind testing. We've also contacted Adam Blake, asking if Pear planned to participate in Randi's double-blind test. After the jump, see the full text of Pear Cable's accusations that Randi's million-dollar offer is a hoax. We'll keep you posted if anyone responds.
Here's Pear Cable CEO Adam Blake's response received by Don, a member of the forum at DIY Mobile Audio:
Nice to hear from you. Yes, by now we have heard about this challenge (although we were never contacted directly). Unfortunately, like most offers of $1 million this one is a hoax. While James Randi is claiming to offer a $1 million dollar prize to differentiate between these speaker cables, by reading the official rules of the challenge, it becomes immediately clear that the offer is not valid. One must be able to "demonstrate any psychic, supernatural or paranormal ability" in order to qualify. Since there is a wealth of scientific information explaining the differences between speaker cables, the offer is not a valid one (and James Randi knows it).
While we publish a frequency response plot demonstrating the differences between cables on our own website here: http://www.pearcable.com/sub_product......, there are also independant measurements and data that can be found for example here: http://www.audiodesignline.com/howto...leID=2... In addition, the High School eductated James Randi who claims to have consulted unnamed experts on the matter makes unsubstantiated claims that our science is junk. Unfortunately true experts do not agree. For example, despite his claims that RFI is not a problem in speaker cables, according to publications by the Amateur Radio Relay League, RFI has been documented as a known problem that can exist in speaker cables.
In addition, according to the editor of Stereophile magazine John Atkinson, James Randi has completely fabricated the statements about Atkinson made in this "challenge". Furthermore, another audiophile who goes by the moniker "Wellfed" on the AudioAsylum forums, says he tried to take the challenge twice for what I consider a more dubious audio tweak (the GSIC chip), but was denied the opportunity and was lied to by the Randi Foundation. Finally, according to these forum posts: http://www.talkaboutaudio.com/group/...es/71... at least one person has tried to take the "challenge" previously to show that they could differentiate between loudspeaker cables and they were denied by Randi who said "Wire is not wire. I accept that".
So, at the end of the day we have claims made by a high school educated retired magician, which are refuted by independent studies and publications conducted by experts. Most importantly, James Randi's "challenge" is backed by nothing. Many audiophiles have already expressed interest in taking the challenge, but they are barred by the contest rules unless they are part of the media. And, in the past, Randi denied audiophiles the chance to take the "challenge" with regard to differentiating between speaker cables.
At Pear Cable we publish objective measurements to demonstrate the improved fidelity of our cables. In addition, we publish reviews and opinions that are based on both blind and non-blind testing. In fact, the comments made by Richard from the Bay Area Audiophile Society on the Comice Silver Interconnects were the result of a blind test he conducted.
We have not yet put together an official response to this joke of a "challenge", so we are not currently participating in the many conversations going on in audio forums as we speak. In any case, I hope you find the above to be informative.