well, she was right. The stuff they were comparing really didn't sound any different and the music really was ****ty. She's brutally honest. It will be interesting to see how she reacts to the stuff at etf next week; kraftwerk blasted through horns may actually cause her to go postal.
lol!!!!!!!!
If true this would apply in all cases whether the cables were the same or different.
I should have said 'people with proven good ears'. BTW what would your definition of good ears be.......don't tell me 🙂
I can't argue with that! 😀
1.For me it does apply in all cases I've tried so far.
2.I don't need to prove anything to anyone about my hearing or my definition of "good ears".....I'm paying for my things😀
3.Good🙂
Your second paragraph I accept - for now.
Regarding your first paragraph, however, it is not simply a case of having on one hand 🙂)) ears which do not work and on the other, ears which do work.
Ears which do not work are easily understood whereas ears which do work may work inefficiently to a large or lesser extent. The range of variation of hearing possibility ranges enormous between being just capable of hearing some sound to having for all intents and purposes perfect hearing.[snip].
I didn't say all that. I said that you need working ears to hear. No working ears - no hear. Simple.😉
[snip]My implied point which is relevant to this thread is that those people with very good and efficient ears may well hear differences in timbre, range, spatial information etc. between cables which - in the lab - show identical measurements. Those with less than good hearing may - most likely - miss each and every variation.
Well, you have a hell of a convoluted way to imply this, because you said that ears are more important than brains for hearing....
Anyway, my point was that all those differences that are 'heard' conciously are much more dependent on how the brain works than on differences between ears. If you indeed accept my second para, well, this is it. 😉
Edit: Re: my 2nd para: I'm not making stuff up here. This is part and parcel of current scientific insight, easy to check within half an hour on the 'net. Just trying to save you some time. What I would hate is someone coming back saying they don't agree because 'I don't think it works that way'. I would hope any reply would be a bit more intelligent ....
jd
Last edited:
I just finished reading an article in November's "audio Xpress by Ed Simon" where he builds a distortion meter to check out cable connectors. His results are summarized as follows
"Soldered connections are 50 times better than the best plain mechanical connectors"
" Gold mating to gold work best"
"Shiny (chrome nickel) connectors mating to gold are not as good when clean and newly inserted but become worse within hours"
"Shiny plugged into shiny is not as good as gold on gold"
"Some gold cords made for audio and video were horrible"
"putting a surge through a cable lowers the distortion for a time but it comes back.(maybe the needle drop noise was good for hifi?)"
oh yeah he does have results for reversing cables too!
I can see now a new preamp, dac, power amp, cd player etc that features solder pins instead of RCA jacks.
another diy project
"Soldered connections are 50 times better than the best plain mechanical connectors"
" Gold mating to gold work best"
"Shiny (chrome nickel) connectors mating to gold are not as good when clean and newly inserted but become worse within hours"
"Shiny plugged into shiny is not as good as gold on gold"
"Some gold cords made for audio and video were horrible"
"putting a surge through a cable lowers the distortion for a time but it comes back.(maybe the needle drop noise was good for hifi?)"
oh yeah he does have results for reversing cables too!
I can see now a new preamp, dac, power amp, cd player etc that features solder pins instead of RCA jacks.
another diy project
Hi,
It's well known that RCA connectors (cinch) are not the best audio connectors and can be a source of distortion and loss of detail.
Ciao, 😉
It's well known that RCA connectors (cinch) are not the best audio connectors and can be a source of distortion and loss of detail.
Ciao, 😉
Hi,
It's well known that RCA connectors (cinch) are not the best audio connectors and can be a source of distortion and loss of detail.
Ciao, 😉
Dimensions is one reason imo.Those of you who have SME arms with the 4-pin(old) plug will notice that the + wires are connected on the thick pins and the
- wires on the thin pins.Resolder them with the + wires on the thin pins and the - wires on the thick pins.It is a worthwile improvement-not just difference-.
Edit:Resolder on both the arm and connector of course
Last edited:
What's universally missed is no logical divide exists between imagining an additive phenomena and a negative one. If, for example, a listener can imagine device 'A' has more top end than device 'B' when measurements show no evidence, why couldn't another listener's imagination conjure up that extra top end when device 'A' measures slightly less top end than 'B' and claim no audible differences?
Interesting thought. The example you give (top end) would probably not trigger the imagination as much as say stereo imaging.
On descriptions, I am a lot happier with people who describe the qualities of the gear such as brightness etc, as apposed to those who describe how the sound makes them feel. Like, "that doesn't emotionally engage me with the music" or "the emotion is gone" If they said it was too bright or rolled off at least I would know what to look for.
Lol! Bring some Haircut 100 for emergencies.Kraftwerk blasted through horns may actually cause her to go postal.

Interesting thought. The example you give (top end) would probably not trigger the imagination as much as say stereo imaging.
.
If a cable has a top end lift that effects instruments on say left channel,unavoidably stereo imaging will "move" probably more on the left side,while a more "correctly" balanced cable will allow the stereo imaging to "move" more between the speakers.Tonal balance is imo important for stereo image
Member
Joined 2002
If a cable has a top end lift that effects instruments on say left channel,unavoidably stereo imaging will "move" probably more on the left side,while a more "correctly" balanced cable will allow the stereo imaging to "move" more between the speakers.Tonal balance is imo important for stereo image
ALL This time i thought if i hung the cables from the ceiling i would not have a problem with balance LOL!!
I am talking of the ear as a transducer. What the brain and/ego does with the information passed is a totally separate process.
It maybe a separate process but you can't tap into the ear itself before it passes the information onto the brain. Everything you hear has been processed.
I didn't say all that. I said that you need working ears to hear. No working ears - no hear. Simple.😉
Agreed - provided that the ears are sending all of the information to the brain. If the ears are impaired then the brain cannot work on missing information. Yes, the brain can give the impression that missing information is present when in fact it has not been signalled through due to impairment. That works admirably when the brain has at one time experienced the benefit of unimpaired ears and thus has the concept of the missing sound available to synthesize!!
Well, you have a hell of a convoluted way to imply this, because you said that ears are more important than brains for hearing....
Anyway, my point was that all those differences that are 'heard' conciously are much more dependent on how the brain works than on differences between ears. If you indeed accept my second para, well, this is it. 😉
Fair enough - subject to the proviso mentioned above.
Edit: Re: my 2nd para: I'm not making stuff up here. This is part and parcel of current scientific insight, easy to check within half an hour on the 'net. Just trying to save you some time. What I would hate is someone coming back saying they don't agree because 'I don't think it works that way'. I would hope any reply would be a bit more intelligent ....
jd
Again - accepted subject to the above comments.
Apologies for the unclear quoting!
ALL This time i thought if i hung the cables from the ceiling i would not have a problem with balance LOL!!
Try it and hung them.Then advice your customers to do the same.Check your sales at the end of the year.A good way to see if your customers are suckers😀
I just finished reading an article in November's "audio Xpress by Ed Simon" where he builds a distortion meter to check out cable connectors. His results are summarized as follows
"Soldered connections are 50 times better than the best plain mechanical connectors"
" Gold mating to gold work best"
"Shiny (chrome nickel) connectors mating to gold are not as good when clean and newly inserted but become worse within hours"
"Shiny plugged into shiny is not as good as gold on gold"
"Some gold cords made for audio and video were horrible"
"putting a surge through a cable lowers the distortion for a time but it comes back.(maybe the needle drop noise was good for hifi?)"
oh yeah he does have results for reversing cables too!
I can see now a new preamp, dac, power amp, cd player etc that features solder pins instead of RCA jacks.
another diy project
I'm going 'integrated'.
If a cable has a top end lift that effects instruments on say left channel,unavoidably stereo imaging will "move" probably more on the left side,while a more "correctly" balanced cable will allow the stereo imaging to "move" more between the speakers.Tonal balance is imo important for stereo image
Thanks but I don't have that problem, I use the same type of cable for L and R. 😀
Thanks but I don't have that problem, I use the same type of cable for L and R. 😀
That was not-as you may have already understood-what I meant.A "bright" cable can effect one channel more,for the simple reason that the other channel does not contain frequencies/instruments where the cable "problem" is.Most stereo music is like that.....in my country😀 In these cases,unavoidably the imaging will move towards one channel,unless of course your system can't reproduce correctly those frequencies anyway........
That was not-as you may have already understood-what I meant.A "bright" cable can effect one channel more,for the simple reason that the other channel does not contain frequencies/instruments where the cable "problem" is.Most stereo music is like that.....in my country😀 In these cases,unavoidably the imaging will move towards one channel,unless of course your system can't reproduce correctly those frequencies anyway........
The more you write the more I think these silver cables are a bad idea 😀
The more you write the more I think these silver cables are a bad idea 😀
Of course they are........ for me 😀
As many engineers here would say,everything in the chain is copper.It is the one silver cable that will make the difference? 🙂
Last edited:
Of course they are........ for me 😀
As many engineers here would say,everything in the chain is copper.It is the one silver cable that will make the difference? 🙂
What is the minimum length that you can hear ?
What is the minimum length that you can hear ?
I haven't done such a test yet,but it would be interresting to check it.What I have done though was to compare two different interconnects(1M pairs)and after I have prefered one of them,I have compared that one with an identical one but 2M pair.The 2M pair was not at all worse than the 1M pair as engineering side would think,nor they had any big difference between them.Both however were better than the other type interconnect.Strange isn't it?
But,if this answers your question,I have tried 3 different headshell wires and heard differences using my mc cartridge.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
- Home
- Design & Build
- Parts
- I don't believe cables make a difference, any input?