I don't believe cables make a difference, any input?

[madinoz]

So Cal. I take it you run your high quality CD player through to your amplifer using any old rubbish interconnects you can find at the local shopping centre. Then you run some awful old wire you dug up in a garbage bin to your wizz-bang speakers, right???
No I don't think you do.
At least be sensible enough to admit that BAD cable can be detrimental to sound quality!
From this point of view then it shouldn't be too much of a leap to see that improving your cable will make some improvement to the system (to a point).
This is not the same issue of whether cables can bring about massive improvements in an already good system.
Think about it........

[analog_sa]

From this point of view then it shouldn't be too much of a leap to see that improving your cable will make some improvement to the system

The entire concept of cables making an audible difference is based on pure horse manure if you cannot or will not hear a difference. None of the explanations i've ever heard holds any water and withstands any scrutiny. For some people this is a very strong argument that cables (provided they take voltage and current from point A to point B) cannot possibly be audible. Such presumed audibility threatens their entire belief system and as such has to be discarded on principle.

If i couldn't hear differences i'd also be laughing at the gullible and ignorant 'golden ears'.

[Cal Weldon]

Dear madinoz from the land of Oz,

Considering the level of opinion on this matter, I really should be careful how I express my opinion.

But it seems these poor thread always go the same way. Downhill.
They turn into peeing matches full of personal attacks. I was hoping to add a little lightness to the topic. I'm glad Carlos had fun with it too.

Dear analog_sa,
I think that was very well put.

Me? I have mid-grade interconnects.
I use 10 ga. high purity copper, 64 strand, high twist, speaker wire from Belden. I bought a 500 ft roll of it, so I guess I agree.

My bad.

Cal

[carlosfm]

Originally posted by Cal Weldon
But it seems these poor thread always go the same way. Downhill.
They turn into peeing matches full of personal attacks.

That's what I meant.

Guys, Christmas is here, and we are a family.
Or a club?
Whatever.

Let's all change the cables, OK?

[pxr5]

please remember folks its a lot easier to throw than it is to catch, input output eh?

[Pan]

Originally posted by bear
It seems like my style of writing in English is passing by Pan... so let's drop the discussion here.

The original question is if cables make a difference... I gave my opinions and their basis... everyone can make up their own minds and will, no matter what anyone says here.

enjoy!

_-_-bear

Since you did not adress my questions I take it as you realize that there are clear audible differences between cables..?

Your basis does not holds much water if you use that as a basis on the argument about cables all sound the same.. now which is it?

Hint, there are clear differences in audiocable performace, bot as measured and by listening tests. This is true for speaker cables, interconnects and power cables. I can´t see why anyone would want to argue against this fact, it´s just plain silly... really.

/Peter

[MartinQ]

I've read a few comparison studies (scientific and/or double blind ... not subjective) and the conclusion is always the same:

If you use a cable that is suited to the task (by professional standards, not 'audio/hi-fi' standards) then there will be no audible result.

What are 'pro' standards for audio then? They are close to the lowest order for signal transmission and few professionals would give it much thought.

Bandwidth: < 100kHz
Signal to Noise: < 100db
Distance: < 100' (usually)

If you want a challenge, try playing with signals in low MHz range... then look into GHz, and high data-rate transmission. Granted, many of these signals require a fairly low s/n ratio, but that generally scales with frequency. ie, if you can send 10MHz over 100' at 60db, then your noise rejection at 1MHz and 100Khz will be much higher. Either way, electrical signals (and analog) over wire is such a tired subject.

Differences can be measured, but they are so small as to be insignificant. You'd be MUCH better off spending ANY amount of time/money on your audio source, speakers, or room design then to ever consider serious money on cable.

I have never heard a plausible theory nor read a study that proved or suggested otherwise.

If anyone can find an electronics engineer (who has practical experience in signal transmission) to back up any of these cable-claims I would be very much surprised and eager to hear what he has to say.


(65 pages!?? ugh....)

[Dave Jones]

Sixty five pages. Hehehehe. I've resisited the temptation to this point. But I'll tell an anecdote.

My boss is a self-styled golden ear audiophile. He has groups over to his house who listen to stereo components and comment on them like wine connoisseurs at a tasting. He was suitably impressed by the Lynn Olson Ariels in my office. But he buys amps with huge bottles, power conditioners, and all sorts of expensive stuff, so it was hard for me to take the compliments gracefully.

One time he was selling some "audiophile grade" interconnects, planning to "upgrade." I told him that he could not tell the difference between the "best" interconnects and the cheapest you could buy at Radio Shack -- and that I could prove it. He snorted at the idea, naturally. Next I asked if speaker cable was supposed to change the sound relative to a short, direct connection. No, of course not he said. Okay.

So I did the following. I took a cheap 6 foot stereo cable from Radio Shack and looped it from the tape monitor input to tape monitor source on the Rotel RA-02 on my desk. I was then able to switch the cables in and out, alternating between the cheap cables and a direct connection.

After only a few minutes he had to admit he could hear absolutely no difference at all. In fact, if I switched quickly he could not even tell I had switched the cheap cables in or out.

Yes, I still have my job. Thanks for asking.

[kolwrath]

On your bosses $40,000 Hifi stereo, it is probably sensitive and accurate enough to hear the differences in cables. In contrast, your Rotel, which probably cost less than one set of his interconnects, is not sensitive enough make the differences distinguishable.

I have a bunch of recordings that sounded great on my old mid-fi Marantz system. Now if I play those same tracks on my new $$ Hifi they sound like crap.

This is all subjective of course but I belive the whole system (that includes amp, speakers, cables and ears) will dictate whether you can hear a difference in cables or not.

The What HiFi 30% rule applies. Spend about 30% of your total system cost on cables, any more and your wasting your money. I belive what they mean is that any more than 30% on cables will not show any improvements due to the fidelity of a system of a specified level.

On the other side of the coin, there are alot of snake oil salesmen out there in the Hifi world. Trust *your* ears, and remeber what you might not be able to hear, somebody else might.

[MartinQ]

Actually, the 30% rule should be more like:

1. Spend 30% on electronics (cables should make up 5% of that)

2. Spend 30% on speakers

3. Spend 30% on the room

... and the rest??? Some good recordings !!

The best cables you can get are most likely made by Belden or one of the other wire manufacturers. Expect to spend from $0.20 to $5.00 a meter (there abouts??)