Actually no, that's why i don't use unbranded or cheap cable.
That's what i am trying to say all this time. China has a great way to surprise you. That's why my DAC is not China made Biggest-deal-fo-the-$$$, not my Amp, not anything. For same reason i recapped my amp with capacitors only from reputable companies and just tomorrow willbe buying 2 caps for 50 euro each instead of chinese "Hitachi???? come onn" which costs twice as cheaper.
I don't say cable has to cost thousands, just that to be reputable. Now i am using, can not remember the brand, Made in Europe cable that cost mere 15 euros from DAC to my Tube Hybrid amp. And that cable is great. i just go to my local repair guy, cause he installs car audio and so. I ask him when i need sth and he says what to buy. I bet nobody ever have heard for that brand, but its just normal good cable. Plus is made from copper
entirelyI bet if i cut my Samsung servo motor encoder cable from my CNC, it will beat any cable from the <500 euro range, say for speakers, as it is really low impedance cable which is to industrial standard. I tried once prolonging it using cheap one, but the servo motor recognised the crap and did not want to start. Was always saying :cable problem
There are worst case scenarios where mic cables can sound different. Jim Brown and friends have AES papers on the problems. Mostly it's SCIN or interference. The papers are in the AES Papers section.
Audio Systems Group, Inc. Publications
In cable threads, there are those who know the audible facts about cable. Telling fact isn't insisting.
In cable threads, those are the cable Kool-Aid drinkers.
I've started to use BNC on my builds, just to be a little different (that's part of diy, right?). Either way, i use some belden coax. I don't think bnc sounds any different at all from rca, I just did it for some kicks. And belden coax is an appropriate and reasonably inexpensive way to go.
I used to use BNCs for everything. The biggest problem is that if you don't have the right diameter coax getting a consistent return connection can be tricky. Now I had a good supply of BNCs from work off old equipment, but all the coax was designed for 2GHz and up and was silver plated steel. Well of course that won't sound good! So I used whatever coax I had around. Naim still use BNC IIRC.
It was nearly 30 years ago and I was young and stupid! I also used SMAs and semirigid on one project.
BNO I fancy using on a phono stage sometime.
Of course nothing wrong with the old 5 pin DIN connectors...
It was nearly 30 years ago and I was young and stupid! I also used SMAs and semirigid on one project.
BNO I fancy using on a phono stage sometime.
Of course nothing wrong with the old 5 pin DIN connectors...
Am I the first to notice, or at least comment on the fact that with the addition of one more letter to his stated location, Boyan would be a citizen of the Sovereign State of Denial?
Cheap shot, yes I know, but as a reformer Kool-Aid junkie from the 80's, I thought that sometimes even a non-sequitur makes as much sense as the conversation into which it's interjected
Cheap shot, yes I know, but as a reformer Kool-Aid junkie from the 80's, I thought that sometimes even a non-sequitur makes as much sense as the conversation into which it's interjected
What if people could ask "I wonder if anyone has done such-and-such, and what their result was?" If one only publishes positive results and this thing always gives negative results, how would anyone find out without actually testing the thing, believing they were the first to do so? It seems like an unnecessary replication of an experiment.
Well, there's this:
"If you’ve made up your mind to test a theory, or you want to explain some idea, you should always decide to publish it whichever way it comes out. If we only publish results of a certain kind, we can make the argument look good. We must publish both kinds of result. For example—let’s take advertising again—suppose some particular cigarette has some particular property, like low nicotine. It’s published widely by the company that this means it is good for you—they don’t say, for instance, that the tars are a different proportion, or that something else is the matter with the cigarette. In other words, publication probability depends upon the answer. That should not be done."
Cargo Cult Science
You may have to explain what a blind test is, and why even people who objectively have very discerning hearing swear by them rather than relying solely on listening when they know whether the "good cable" is being used.
But even this may fall on ... oh, I won't say it.
But I'm neither buying nor selling something. This is a hobby for me, so I will tell you about a negative result if you ask. But why should I clutter up a forum with negativity? There are plenty who seem to take pleasure in doing that, and frankly it gets boring and unpleasant.
And you seem to be quoting a response to scientific publication; what has that to do with me?
110 ohm is due to impedance matching at digital line level for AES/EBU standard. For SPDIF RCA it's 75 ohm, for analogue line level signal it doesn't matter.
Indeed https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelson–Morley_experiment if people didn't publish failures 20th century science might have taken a lot longer to come up with the toys you all love so!
Actually I was thinking more of the negative responses to anything that doesn't fit the respondants' experience/belief/prejudice. A negative result of an experiment is fine. But I doubt if anyone is interested in how many different configurations I have tried of something where there was no perceptible difference. I certainly wouldn't be! But far too often someone hears something (this is the diy Audio forum, after all), and he gets personal negativity. We've just had someone who thought it was clever to conflate Boyan's location with "denial"!
As it happens I have no interest in silver plating for audio, but he asked reasonable questions, I thought. And then, of course, we were off into the world of "messing about with wires is a waste of time, blah, blah". Sad.
Hears, or thinks he hears? Personal negativity, or correction of false ideas?awkwardbydesign said:
Two issues which people keep getting wrong:
1. 'hear' means ears unaided by sight or other information, when what is claimed is at odds with accepted knowledge
2. 'I prefer' and 'is better' do not have the same meaning in English
It is easy to make an audio system sound different. Two quick ways are to change the frequency response by a small amount, or introduce a fault - cables can do both, but usually only when the equipment or the cable is poorly designed. It is harder to genuinely improve a well-designed system; impossible to do this merely by swapping cables.
What's interesting is how well Michelson is known for that, yet he made this fascinating machine that virtually no one has heard of - indeed without this "engineer guy" seeing it in an old dusty college hallway, getting it out and documenting it in his book and videos, I and many others would never have heard of it:
Albert Michelson's Harmonic Analyzer (book details))
His Wikipedia entry doesn't even mention this device (!) yet it tells how he was once portrayed on TV:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_A._Michelson#Michelson_in_popular_culture
Oh, my ...
I decided at the end to give a go for the Caswell plating kit. Will see what happens. Maybe i should have directed the question to them , about plating thickness and durability.
But who would guess that there are so many "scientists" here.
Next time you like to discuss cables, benefits and sound perception i kindly suggest you open your own thread where you could brag until world ends.
As far as the people doubting my sound perception, i will note that i design for living /and for fun/ acoustical musical instruments including mine own from scratch, which i sell to musicians. So i spend much time trying to hear "whats not there" as you would put it.
It's worth noting also that implying that " there is no difference between this and that..." apart from offending many people in the industry that design Premium audio equipment you try to put yourself in the position of all knowing.
A bit more humility wouldn't be a bad idea. One must be quiet in order to be able to listen.
Very important point i see in all this useless otherwise discussion is that the naysayers insist that there must be a scientific proof that minor changes/ cabling, etc.../ . But why i or anybody would need to prove you sth? Even if you are proven, you would not believe it if you are not able to hear it yourself.
I am starting to wonder on what quality of equipment are you judging if there is a change of sound when cable changed or not. It will be interesting to see when sb says sth what is his set up and real life experience with equipment.
About the personal perception. Of course someone could be distracted, nervous or whatever in his mind and not be able to discern 2 cables or whatever change. Give that man time, give him his favourite music which he associates his feelings and experiences with it, and you will see he hears it.
Finally i don't have a desire, interest or time to prove things to those concerned. That does not mean anyone could not scientifically prove my point.
Some read and experiment suggestions :
-Inform yourselves about quantum physics and especially about Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle
-dig deeper in sound perception, musical instruments, harmonics and so, you will find that some octaves tuning apart from base note affect how sound is perceived especially about brightness, metallic, wooden, warm, etc. So a minor change in pitch reproduction in say 6th octavewould lead to more metallic sound, etc.
-there is a very nice chromatic tuning software i use - Linotune . It could detect pitch deviations, could be programmed to monitor how a pitch is reproduced in as many octaves as you want at same time, so i assume it would be quite easy to find the small deviations which occur when a component or a cable is changed in the audio chain.
PS. If some scientific purist has expensive capacitors, cables or audio equipment and does not hear differences using them, i will be very happy to exchange that for free with lesser one. After all there is no difference, right
But who would guess that there are so many "scientists" here.
Next time you like to discuss cables, benefits and sound perception i kindly suggest you open your own thread where you could brag until world ends.
As far as the people doubting my sound perception, i will note that i design for living /and for fun/ acoustical musical instruments including mine own from scratch, which i sell to musicians. So i spend much time trying to hear "whats not there" as you would put it.
It's worth noting also that implying that " there is no difference between this and that..." apart from offending many people in the industry that design Premium audio equipment you try to put yourself in the position of all knowing.
A bit more humility wouldn't be a bad idea. One must be quiet in order to be able to listen.
Very important point i see in all this useless otherwise discussion is that the naysayers insist that there must be a scientific proof that minor changes/ cabling, etc.../ . But why i or anybody would need to prove you sth? Even if you are proven, you would not believe it if you are not able to hear it yourself.
I am starting to wonder on what quality of equipment are you judging if there is a change of sound when cable changed or not. It will be interesting to see when sb says sth what is his set up and real life experience with equipment.
About the personal perception. Of course someone could be distracted, nervous or whatever in his mind and not be able to discern 2 cables or whatever change. Give that man time, give him his favourite music which he associates his feelings and experiences with it, and you will see he hears it.
Finally i don't have a desire, interest or time to prove things to those concerned. That does not mean anyone could not scientifically prove my point.
Some read and experiment suggestions :
-Inform yourselves about quantum physics and especially about Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle
-dig deeper in sound perception, musical instruments, harmonics and so, you will find that some octaves tuning apart from base note affect how sound is perceived especially about brightness, metallic, wooden, warm, etc. So a minor change in pitch reproduction in say 6th octavewould lead to more metallic sound, etc.
-there is a very nice chromatic tuning software i use - Linotune . It could detect pitch deviations, could be programmed to monitor how a pitch is reproduced in as many octaves as you want at same time, so i assume it would be quite easy to find the small deviations which occur when a component or a cable is changed in the audio chain.
PS. If some scientific purist has expensive capacitors, cables or audio equipment and does not hear differences using them, i will be very happy to exchange that for free with lesser one. After all there is no difference, right
Last edited:
If you won't, why should anyone else bother?
The "tell" is the mention of quantum mechanics, a classic sign of nonsense in audio.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.