I propose dropping the straw men arguments. Or be consistent. Monster Cable is everywhere and been decried here as the 1st Horseman, obviously many people believe they hear them.
And it still seems difficult for some here to comprehend that while interesting, the 'tests' to date been exceptional for lack of scientific rigour. You have an analysis of sufficient size that's been properly reviewed and published, or is your standard for 'scientific' guys in a basement?
Had the latest smoking gun, the 'Matrix test' posted earlier, arrived at a significant result instead of null its protocol would have been savaged here.
Was that an answer to my question?
To answer yours: Monster Cable is everywhere because retail likes it. Go to J&R in NY - Monster is all you can buy.
As to "our" tests: They show that "your" claims are irrational. Sun came up the last few days, will come up tomorrow, etc. etc.
Now would you be so kind to answer my question. Shouting "straw man" in each and every post doesn't make it one.
To answer yours: Monster Cable is everywhere because retail likes it. Go to J&R in NY - Monster is all you can buy.
As to "our" tests: They show that "your" claims are irrational. Sun came up the last few days, will come up tomorrow, etc. etc.
Now would you be so kind to answer my question. Shouting "straw man" in each and every post doesn't make it one.
Last edited:
I don't know about you, but I used to sell Monster Cable in my shop. I like the stuff to be perfectly honest about it, but I sure can't hear a difference unless the other subject cable is either broken/defective or just horribly produced.
Now, to put this into perspective, I never recommended going above the 300 series. The double shield and decent standard dimensions of the RCA plugs are really all you should need. The "Turbine cut" grips the RCA jack too hard and usually encourages people to rip the outer ground cylinder out of most normal equipment connectors. Excluding the more chunky structures that audiophiles like to use. Either that, or people succeed in damaging the wire connections in the cable.
My other favorite cables are those I make myself using something like a Canaire double shield wire and a good RCA connector, like the Monster 300 series you could buy separately.
There are a few basic things to look for in a signal cable (and many more for extreme cables). A fine stranded wire along with jacket and dielectric which makes the cable very flexible and easy to work with. Sufficient wire gage suiting the impedances involved in your system. A dielectric that exhibits low dielectric absorption would be nice. Remember those microphone cables that would make a "bwanggg" sound if you slapped them against the ground, or tapped them with your shoe? That was fun - if nothing else. A low capacitance (per foot) cable suiting your system impedances.
The goal is to avoid affecting the audio signal as much as possible. The percent shield coverage is an indicator of how well the cable may resist RF contamination. Don;t count on balanced cable systems to ignore RF. Balanced works on the idea of phase cancellation. With RF signals, there is no way to ensure the invading RF is in fact 180° out of phase upon reaching the input circuits. In fact, I'd pretty much guarantee that the RF will not cancel, nor will the amount of RF remain constant. It's far easier to filter that stuff out (avoiding the pin 1 problem if your interconnects are balanced).
What's my point? Simple. Too many basic things are misrepresented in most of the advertising. Your average consumer has many misconceptions and really hasn't got anything to go on in order to decide what cable to buy. Things go rapidly downhill once an attempt to study cables on the internet.
Very often, what differentiates good cables from bad ones are straight forward electronic engineering concepts. That, and knowing what the characteristics of your own equipment are so you can select cables optimized the way you need them. Also, knowing how much RF interference and noise exists in the area where you will be listening should guide your choices. There are a few factors to consider, but making an informed decision isn't that hard once the basics are known.
Oh yeah, I like the colour blue that Monster Cable uses often. 😀
-Chris
Now, to put this into perspective, I never recommended going above the 300 series. The double shield and decent standard dimensions of the RCA plugs are really all you should need. The "Turbine cut" grips the RCA jack too hard and usually encourages people to rip the outer ground cylinder out of most normal equipment connectors. Excluding the more chunky structures that audiophiles like to use. Either that, or people succeed in damaging the wire connections in the cable.
My other favorite cables are those I make myself using something like a Canaire double shield wire and a good RCA connector, like the Monster 300 series you could buy separately.
There are a few basic things to look for in a signal cable (and many more for extreme cables). A fine stranded wire along with jacket and dielectric which makes the cable very flexible and easy to work with. Sufficient wire gage suiting the impedances involved in your system. A dielectric that exhibits low dielectric absorption would be nice. Remember those microphone cables that would make a "bwanggg" sound if you slapped them against the ground, or tapped them with your shoe? That was fun - if nothing else. A low capacitance (per foot) cable suiting your system impedances.
The goal is to avoid affecting the audio signal as much as possible. The percent shield coverage is an indicator of how well the cable may resist RF contamination. Don;t count on balanced cable systems to ignore RF. Balanced works on the idea of phase cancellation. With RF signals, there is no way to ensure the invading RF is in fact 180° out of phase upon reaching the input circuits. In fact, I'd pretty much guarantee that the RF will not cancel, nor will the amount of RF remain constant. It's far easier to filter that stuff out (avoiding the pin 1 problem if your interconnects are balanced).
What's my point? Simple. Too many basic things are misrepresented in most of the advertising. Your average consumer has many misconceptions and really hasn't got anything to go on in order to decide what cable to buy. Things go rapidly downhill once an attempt to study cables on the internet.
Very often, what differentiates good cables from bad ones are straight forward electronic engineering concepts. That, and knowing what the characteristics of your own equipment are so you can select cables optimized the way you need them. Also, knowing how much RF interference and noise exists in the area where you will be listening should guide your choices. There are a few factors to consider, but making an informed decision isn't that hard once the basics are known.
Oh yeah, I like the colour blue that Monster Cable uses often. 😀
-Chris
I did a similar mistake with a cheap cd/dvd player to save some money🙂
Never again,no matter what the measurements say.So,you think that all these diy'ers in this and other forums who build their own amplifiers,are simply wasting their time and money?Would they better buy a cheap receiver?
As for me,I'd chose to stay with my delusions🙄 If what I'm hearing is coloured,tell me where I can buy a cheap rainbow.
You had a certain listening experience with a cable. Then you learned something about the interface electronics, and you said you would 'connect the cable again and do a re-listening'. That means that you expect the cable to sound different now that you 'know about the interface electronics'.
jd
Last edited:
subjective vs. objective hearing vs.measurement
If I can hear a difference but you can't measure it, then some here want to convince me that the difference does not exist. I must disagree.
Yes hearing is subjective, not everyone will hear things the same and there is much learning that goes on in listening, most people are not trained or practiced at listening. But this does not mean that different cables are not different sonically even if they measure the same. How long has this science been around? 100-200 years? You are trying to tell me that millions of years worth of evolution in hearing is trumped by this new human science? That makes no sense. I am a scientist, and like most I understand how little we know and how much is left to understand.
FYI
In my system I use no stranded cable. I never like how it sounds. I only use solid copper twisted pairs. That includes internal wiring, power cords, speaker wire and interconnects.
If I can hear a difference but you can't measure it, then some here want to convince me that the difference does not exist. I must disagree.
Yes hearing is subjective, not everyone will hear things the same and there is much learning that goes on in listening, most people are not trained or practiced at listening. But this does not mean that different cables are not different sonically even if they measure the same. How long has this science been around? 100-200 years? You are trying to tell me that millions of years worth of evolution in hearing is trumped by this new human science? That makes no sense. I am a scientist, and like most I understand how little we know and how much is left to understand.
FYI
In my system I use no stranded cable. I never like how it sounds. I only use solid copper twisted pairs. That includes internal wiring, power cords, speaker wire and interconnects.
You have to be carefull not to mix up ´correlation´ with ´causality´ ; as stated before it is quite unlikely to measure no difference between two interconnects (just as an example of different construction) but the sometimes much harder work is to find a causal relationship between a measured difference and a (maybe existent) audible effect.
Wishes
Seems that you´ve spoken to the wrong group of recording engineers; maybe that a subconscious mechanism did play a role in that? 🙂 (just kidding, but if you take your own arguments serious....)
Obviously Jack Renner and his team could have given different answers, James Boyk offers a different opinion, Bernie Grundman thought different and the whole bunch of people cited with testiomials at the vovox website clearly expressed a different opinion.
Does that all really matters? Of course not if we are talking about evidence in a scientific sense, but from a practical point of view it might mean something.
BTW, i would certainly not disagree with the point that room and loudspeaker do have bigger impact overall, but a sound reproduction chain is a holistic system and cables might introduce an unwanted influence. You have to choose the right cable for the specific situation and it does depend not the price point of the cable but on the construction.
In reality things (and situations) are normally not perfect and so you have to deal with the imperfections.
Of course that is strictly spoken just a hypothesis too, but i remember Bruno Putzeys talking about experiments over at gradient where they placed a loudspeaker in am anechoic chamber with a microphone in front and to try some things and they found that the impact of some modifications was far less compared to a normal listening setup in a more lively room.
Wishes
Well, the point is the interfacing electronics changed. So based on this understanding, wouldn't it be a logical move to see whether the difficiency that was heard (owning quite a few pairs now in storage) still exists or not? As an engineer, wouldn't it be a responsible way to verify how valid and effective electronics changes are? Perhaps you'd like to elaborate what better process makes sense?
True, without perception, there would be no motivation for development. Man did not like sitting in the dirt, so we now have other things to sit on.😉
Whenever I re-evaluate something, that's the process I go through. I don't even know what Damage you are talking about.
The way I look at it, if anyone can point out something that I missed, I learn more. So what Damage are you talking about? If you'd like to quote out what I have posted to lead you to "perceive" I am doing Damage control, I certainly would like to know about it.Nope, there is ZERO chance in audible effects being unmeasureable.
Once again, how is this so hard to believe. I know many would like to "believe" what they hear wouldnt show up in a measurement being its the only way to justify their experience but measurements FAR exceed what anyone can hear.
To think that measurements are so detailed and show many aspects of the in room response that the ear can not pick but then turn around and say an audible effect is not measureable is a foolish thought and its the crux of the 1430 pages. Its pointless to have an intelligent audio discussion with anyone that thinks measurements are still in the dark ages.
Last edited:
its okay to be dellusioned. The first step is to actually admit it.
Its cool that you are finally admitting it 😉
Who said that? If you hear a difference then measurements should show that difference. But the real problem is that up to this day nobody could even show in DBTs that an audible difference exists.
Depends on what you're after. If you like listening to music then you need to focus on acoustics. If you like to build things then why not spend your time building amps or knitting socks.
I probably spoke to the "minority" of engineers that produce 97% of all recordings.
What exactly did they say about "cable sound"?
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.