I only referring to sonic quality not balance. I think balance is what you are talking about and if your cables are causing a problem that way then I totally agree.
I know some people that claim they can hear a sonic difference between common 10 gauge stranded wire and 10 gauge audiophile cable at the same lengths.
I guess if you own a $5000.00 to $25000.00 power amp you probably couldn't stomach connecting it to your speakers using $50.00 cable. You'd have to use the $4000.00 cable.
Am I supposed to believe that *gold* plated cables are supposed to deliver sound better than ordinary copper cables?
I think that a majority of high end cables out there deliver a placebo effect.. Just because it cost more, it makes you actually believe that it sounds better.
Marketing here is the key..
I think that a majority of high end cables out there deliver a placebo effect.. Just because it cost more, it makes you actually believe that it sounds better.
Marketing here is the key..
Not a good analogy, when you digitize a signal, it has to be reconstructed afterwards with a usual loss of detail anyway. With an analog signal you have to preserve every detail, no matter how small, there is no way to recover lost information.
This is OT, but I can't let that statement go unchallenged.
Given an appropriate choice of sampling frequency and word length, then the chain from input analog signal to digital stream then back to output analog preserves all the information present in the input signal. That is, there is no loss of information. So there can be no "loss of detail".
Used in conjunction with poorly designed electronics to "enhance" the sound, for a few orders of magnitude more cost than a few passive components.
Nobody would buy those perfect electronics unles you had world-class marketing for them. Thing is, once you have world-class marketing, why bother with perfect electronics
jd
So you don't get any signal degradation through the A/D, D/A and amplifier stages?
No amount of passive components can fix what is lost with poorly designed cables.
In general that statement is not true; of course in the end it becames a somewhat philosophical discussion what "appropriate" could mean, but normally you need an infinite effort to reconstruct a sampled signal without any loss and an amplitude quantization process makes the situation even more worse.
@janneman,
too complicated; SY could argue that a lot of perfect gear already exists- per definitionem every piece that does not lead to reported audible differences due to cable exchange.
Wishes
You would be surprised what some audiophiles do.So you don't get any signal degradation through the A/D, D/A and amplifier stages?
No amount of passive components can fix what is lost with poorly designed cables.
Some things actually do improve listening experience.I´m not sure what that means. Of course customers could be misleaded in their buying decisions by a lot of factors, but we are talking about a subgroup that is somewhat dedicated to "good sound quality" (avoids the questionable term "reproduction quality" ).
While overall there is a general agreement about certain requirements that should/must be fulfilled (directivity, response linearity and so on), there is otoh a quite wide span for individually different needs.
Look for example at the standard deviation in each data point if a group is tested or take the astonishing high differences in the hearing curves of different people. If you combine that with the individual daily needs (living room for reproduction vs. dedicated listening room and a lot of other questions) and with the very different recording/music styles it leads to the conclusion that a "one fits it all approach" couldn´t be existent in the real world.
Maybe i´m not creative enough in that point, but i don´t see that blind test results delivered by manufacturers could solve these problems, as it is impossible to individualize this process to a sufficient degree, but general guidelines for reproduction overall and more refined guidelines to meet individual demands along with better training of dealers and customers would help a lot i think.
Wishes
But you should remember that both fields are inexact sciences wrt the impact to a human.
That is the reason why a doctor (in a lot of cases his recommendations are based on the studies of other researchers and organisations see for example WHO guidelines) for exactly the same desease after some time a totally different cure, sometimes even the totally opposite one.
The price of a cable doesn´t play the major role in this game because the debate about audible cable differences started long before these expensive marketing results exist.
One may strongly _believe_ that cables can´t lead to audible differences (assumed that "nonpathological" construction were given
), but in most cases that is just based on some psychoacoustic experiments done by others.Wishes
I feel it very humorous that doctors are mentioned here. I have seen many, and only very few can answer questions fully. Some just get offended, some will discuss the situation just fine. A relative in the US tells me that this answer this given quite often "I can only tell you what I am trained..." which I would find humiliating if I provided a response like that.
Nobody would buy those perfect electronics unles you had world-class marketing for them. Thing is, once you have world-class marketing, why bother with perfect electronics
jd
Publish your own hifi magazine then,and make marketing easier and "honest".
You will see that if you are right,consumers will reward you.All get the share they deserve.They only need to find the right way to claim it.Empty words and accusations about someone else's products is not the right way.They only serve one in enjoying his "perfection" alone.
I have long believed that audio needed a medium which reported on audio equipment accurately. But such an approach is doomed to failure. There is only ever going to be one "best" of anything, and the rest will resent you and not support you. It's far easiuer to claim that everything is "the best", as the mags do now, then nobody is unhappy, except that the reviews are then meaningless. As long as subjectivity remains the core of audio evaluation this situation is not going to change. The more eval;uations are based on objective data the more reliable they will become.
No one disagrees with you.But standing oposite and throwing stones will lead you nowhere.If we all say that we hold the "truth" but every effort to spread the good news is doomed to fail,then why are we complaining for the domination of "lies" ? It may sound strange to you,but I haven't bought a hifi magazine in the last 20+ years.Why?Because I agree with you,but since you admit that any effort to help "me" is doomed to fail,I had to trust myself in my choices.After all it is me who will listen to my system.And what matters to "me" is only to enjoy it.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.