You are, of course, entitled to your opinion. Some of us find it quite interesting.A new low for the diyaudio forum. Pointless and of no value.
OK, it's boxing day and here are the results of the listening tests so far.
There were a few correct guesses, which is good. Maybe a little better than random, what do you think?
Let's get some more people to listen. This thread has over 3000 views, some of you must be curious, right?
There were a few correct guesses, which is good. Maybe a little better than random, what do you think?
Let's get some more people to listen. This thread has over 3000 views, some of you must be curious, right?
i should probably do more trials,
i find it quite surprising that i picked on both my trials the banana as "best sounding" (aka original) .... followed by the original, then either mud or copper (got copper/mud once right, once wrong)
more trials would need to confirm if the banana is actually that good sounding, of what resistance we are speaking here? could one of the materials even have parasitic capacitance making it a high frequency filter maybe?
imo banana and original sound "more similar" than for example mud and banana (mud and copper was another pair that sounded similar to me, hard to distinguish)
Yep, i was one of the banana pickers lol
i find it quite surprising that i picked on both my trials the banana as "best sounding" (aka original) .... followed by the original, then either mud or copper (got copper/mud once right, once wrong)
more trials would need to confirm if the banana is actually that good sounding, of what resistance we are speaking here? could one of the materials even have parasitic capacitance making it a high frequency filter maybe?
imo banana and original sound "more similar" than for example mud and banana (mud and copper was another pair that sounded similar to me, hard to distinguish)
Yep, i was one of the banana pickers lol
A new low for the diyaudio forum. Pointless and of no value.
What was the previous low then?
It would be interesting to see what sort of shape there is to the resistance. I did do an comparison of the files but did not share because I did not want to ruin the experience.what resistance we are speaking here
There was a minor decay difference pretty far down in volume.
Is it a better sound or is there some change in what frequencies are played due to a resistance somewhere in the range?
mud and copper had some "harshness or distortion" to them that was actually gone with banana and original, in my mind banana and original actually sounded very similar, i was trying to pick the original but for some reason i landed two out of two times on the banana 🤣 but i was listening to that harshness not necessarly a dip in the frequency response or suchIs it a better sound or is there some change in what frequencies are played due to a resistance somewhere in the range?
For me the crazy part was not that i picked the banana (twice!), but how close mud and copper sounded lol
All but one of the conductors measures pretty darn flat. But one does have a slight difference in the HF, and that might be what people are hearing.
So it seems. Maybe no one wants to actually learn how little the audio signal is affected by interconnects (and maybe other things). Or at least they don't want to publicly acknowledge it.Apparently, the viewers were not interested enough.
Too bad, as it's a nice demonstration of how things actually work.
this is absolutely awesome i'm currently doing another round of listening to see if my seemingly favorable preference for bananas would fall apart if carrots where brought in....
i love that it flies in the face of the quasi religious beliefs about esoteric materials for interconnects and the unending price gouging that goes on.
maybe we should try it with "balanced bananas"...cuz there seems to be a new cult there to...
i love that it flies in the face of the quasi religious beliefs about esoteric materials for interconnects and the unending price gouging that goes on.
maybe we should try it with "balanced bananas"...cuz there seems to be a new cult there to...
mbrennwa see post #1 for the link to the files for listening.
or are you proposing a new round of tests?
or are you proposing a new round of tests?
Go ahead and listen to whatever you like, send me your results and I will add them to the chart. Cheers!or should I simply focus on those already shown in post #64?
I always knew the high-end stuff isn't that much better than the cheap stuff, but my results take this knowledge to a whole new level. Ouch! 🙄
If you mean interconnects, then yes. Other things do make a difference.
What does seem to actually matter for interconnects is DCR and shielding. Mud and bananas cause signal level loss and one of those materials does not have a flat frequency response. They are also very noisy if not shielded - see the photos.
What doesn’t seem to make much (if any) difference in sonic quality is the material of the conductor.
You don’t need OFC or 99.999999% pure silver, or Litz wire or anything special. Good old copper wire does the job. Steel, iron or aluminium probably would too. 🙂
What does seem to actually matter for interconnects is DCR and shielding. Mud and bananas cause signal level loss and one of those materials does not have a flat frequency response. They are also very noisy if not shielded - see the photos.
What doesn’t seem to make much (if any) difference in sonic quality is the material of the conductor.
You don’t need OFC or 99.999999% pure silver, or Litz wire or anything special. Good old copper wire does the job. Steel, iron or aluminium probably would too. 🙂
Maybe there are high-end bananas. The common (Cavendish type) tastes not the best. And for interconnect it is too short.
- Home
- General Interest
- Everything Else
- Copper wire vs bananas vs mud - An interconnect test