The only "problem" I see whatever the outcome of the test will be,is the price of Tom's cable.If the result is positive,many will say "it took a thousands of dollars cable to hear small differences",and if the result is negative thecomments will be "not even with a thousands of dollars cable it was possible to hear the differences".......It never ends.The comments however (whatever these will be),will be justified.
I agree but only if my ears are in agreement also.
Just wondering which system is the most accurate, the one that measures good and makes a piano sound like a real piano while using a good recording or one that measures 'perfect' and sound unrealistic, thin and uninvolving. I also believe that a good sounding system will measure good, I'm however not convinced that the opposite is always true.
Cables can not improve SQ, the good ones only do less damage.
Why would price be a "problem"? We're looking for truth. The price for a cable is not only justified by its function.
If no difference is audible then there's one more prove that there is and will be no "cable sound".
If a difference is audible then there's at least one case that can be further examined to find the reason for an audible difference.
I'm fine with both because either way knowledge is gained.
Yes,knowledge is gained in both possibilities.But why in case of Tom's failure this is "proof" while in case of a positive result from Tom it is "a case" for further examination?It is already known that the majority of listeners,cannot hear cable differences.Why aren't you ready to accept Tom's possible positive result as proof also?All here seem to trust that SY will contact the test correctly.
Don't you suspect that in case of a positive result the conclusion will be that Tom's system is not competently designed?I am.
Last edited:
Because if the sun comes up at that day, it will come up the following days too.
No.Because if Tom has a positive result,you will still not be able to hear cable differences.Or will you?
Irrelevant. If Tom can hear the difference between two cables because of non-mundane factors, the case for "cable magic" is proved. It's immaterial that 100% of people can't.
Hi,
Sorry to pick a post from a few pages back....
I feel that nowadays there's only one fact about music and that is that is being "produced".
To some of us there actually are some references in the recorded music even though those may not be to everyone's taste.
Isn't the point of "producing" records not to make them more to everyone's taste?
To make them more enjoyable (whatever that means) on everyone's equipment, i.e your average transistor radio?
At the end of the day all these manipulations serve one thing and one thing only, to make the product sell.
When you make music in order to sell it are you an artist or are you a producer of product?
At home you can then recycle that product to your particular taste using all kinds of fancy tricks to please your auditory senses according to the mood of the day.
I am sure this is not what you meant to say but let's agree or disagree on one thing: a recording should be a faithful reproduction of a musical event. Anything else is just ear candy for the masses.
So, to get this topic back on track, when I choose a cable, or any other piece of equipment for that matter, I choose it so it can hopefully take me one step closer to enjoying my collection of art the way the recording engineer captured it.
Not to say I don't enjoy produced music at all but listening to sound engineers tricks and overdubs isn't quite my idea of fun for that's what you're going to hear on a revealing enough system.
It may rock, sometimes. Mostly I just roll...over.
Cheers,
P.S. Can anyone explain to me why my OTL amps keep popping their fuses when being fed Jimmy H.'s "Electric Ladyland" ? Bummer...
Sorry to pick a post from a few pages back....
I feel that nowadays there's only one fact about music and that is that is being "produced".
To some of us there actually are some references in the recorded music even though those may not be to everyone's taste.
Isn't the point of "producing" records not to make them more to everyone's taste?
To make them more enjoyable (whatever that means) on everyone's equipment, i.e your average transistor radio?
At the end of the day all these manipulations serve one thing and one thing only, to make the product sell.
When you make music in order to sell it are you an artist or are you a producer of product?
At home you can then recycle that product to your particular taste using all kinds of fancy tricks to please your auditory senses according to the mood of the day.
I am sure this is not what you meant to say but let's agree or disagree on one thing: a recording should be a faithful reproduction of a musical event. Anything else is just ear candy for the masses.
So, to get this topic back on track, when I choose a cable, or any other piece of equipment for that matter, I choose it so it can hopefully take me one step closer to enjoying my collection of art the way the recording engineer captured it.
Not to say I don't enjoy produced music at all but listening to sound engineers tricks and overdubs isn't quite my idea of fun for that's what you're going to hear on a revealing enough system.
It may rock, sometimes. Mostly I just roll...over.
Cheers,
P.S. Can anyone explain to me why my OTL amps keep popping their fuses when being fed Jimmy H.'s "Electric Ladyland" ? Bummer...
I would prefer "if Tom can hear the difference between two cables after you agree that they can't possibly have any audible differences" then the case of cable differences is proved.If the majority of listeners can't hear these differences,that is immaterial.As for the sun,it will come up as always.
Hi,
Reread carefully and pick up on SY's impeccable math and, more importantly, his razor sharp sense of humour.
Have another salad, it's full of vitamins...
Cheers,
Reread carefully and pick up on SY's impeccable math and, more importantly, his razor sharp sense of humour.
Have another salad, it's full of vitamins...
Cheers,
Hi,
Sorry to pick a post from a few pages back....
I feel that nowadays there's only one fact about music and that is that is being "produced".
To some of us there actually are some references in the recorded music even though those may not be to everyone's taste.
Isn't the point of "producing" records not to make them more to everyone's taste?
To make them more enjoyable (whatever that means) on everyone's equipment, i.e your average transistor radio?
At the end of the day all these manipulations serve one thing and one thing only, to make the product sell.
When you make music in order to sell it are you an artist or are you a producer of product?
At home you can then recycle that product to your particular taste using all kinds of fancy tricks to please your auditory senses according to the mood of the day.
I am sure this is not what you meant to say but let's agree or disagree on one thing: a recording should be a faithful reproduction of a musical event. Anything else is just ear candy for the masses.
So, to get this topic back on track, when I choose a cable, or any other piece of equipment for that matter, I choose it so it can hopefully take me one step closer to enjoying my collection of art the way the recording engineer captured it.
Not to say I don't enjoy produced music at all but listening to sound engineers tricks and overdubs isn't quite my idea of fun for that's what you're going to hear on a revealing enough system.
It may rock, sometimes. Mostly I just roll...over.
Cheers,
P.S. Can anyone explain to me why my OTL amps keep popping their fuses when being fed Jimmy H.'s "Electric Ladyland" ? Bummer...
How do we know the way the recording engineer captured it?
I know that a transparent system will sound bad with a bad recording.I also know that no well designed cable will never make a bad recording sound good.These are not the cable differences some here speak about.Yes,they speak of small differences,that may be welcome in the final sound of their systems,and if they can justify the cost,they buy these cables.I believe you are one of those who can tell that cable differences are not because of RLC reasons only.Please don't make me ask again if anyone has ever compared the three audioquest cables that had identical geometry,shielding,insulations,but three different conductor metals( of which the two were copper)
Hi,
Reread carefully and pick up on SY's impeccable math and, more importantly, his razor sharp sense of humour.
Have another salad, it's full of vitamins...
Cheers,
That is the reason why I told him how I would agree with him.Also to avoid mistakes because of my Greeglish
Edit:I will try to sharpen my sense of humour.Any input?
Last edited:
So you want to do me a favor by giving me the chance to repeat everything that has already been said? That's nice but no thanks.
Hi,
I do not expect artistic perfection from the recording engineer even though I consider him and his job as much part of the artefact as the artist themselves.
How do you know?
I think you just know when it's for real or not.
Most of the piano recordings I own I consider productions. A couple of them I consider as a recording of a piano. See the difference?
Guess you know it when you hear it.
Why do you think some of the early Decca recordings are so much sought after?
Rudy van Gelder's work for Blue Note?
Some of those Harmonia Mundi recordings done by one particular engineer?
They're popular because they're honest.
Minor flaws are easily forgiven when facing a work of art and that's what they are.
Art is also the passionate way you're defending yourself. For without passion there can't be art.
Whether that love is expressed through gold, silver or copper cable or a simple keyboard is not what's really relevant...
Cheers,
How do we know the way the recording engineer captured it?
I know that a transparent system will sound bad with a bad recording.I also know that no well designed cable will never make a bad recording sound good.These are not the cable differences some here speak about.Yes,they speak of small differences,that may be welcome in the final sound of their systems,and if they can justify the cost,they buy these cables.I believe you are one of those who can tell that cable differences are not because of RLC reasons only.Please don't make me ask again if anyone has ever compared the three audioquest cables that had identical geometry,shielding,insulations,but three different conductor metals( of which the two were copper)
I do not expect artistic perfection from the recording engineer even though I consider him and his job as much part of the artefact as the artist themselves.
How do you know?
I think you just know when it's for real or not.
Most of the piano recordings I own I consider productions. A couple of them I consider as a recording of a piano. See the difference?
Guess you know it when you hear it.
Why do you think some of the early Decca recordings are so much sought after?
Rudy van Gelder's work for Blue Note?
Some of those Harmonia Mundi recordings done by one particular engineer?
They're popular because they're honest.
Minor flaws are easily forgiven when facing a work of art and that's what they are.
Art is also the passionate way you're defending yourself. For without passion there can't be art.
Whether that love is expressed through gold, silver or copper cable or a simple keyboard is not what's really relevant...
Cheers,
Last edited:
Hi,
Reread carefully and pick up on SY's impeccable math and, more importantly, his razor sharp sense of humour.
Have another salad, it's full of vitamins...
Cheers,
Ok,I have tried my best and reread SY's post.I think that SY still doesn't feel confortable to say in plain words, that, if Tom hears the differences between the two cables that SY will approve and accept that they cannot possibly have any audible differences,cable differences do exist and are not related to LCR reasons only.As for his razor sharp sense of humour,IF I got it right,I think I'd call it evasion.But then,mine is not that sharp,so I may be mistaken again.
Hi,
I do not expect artistic perfection from the recording engineer even though I consider him and his job as much part of the artefact as the artist themselves.
How do you know?
I think you just know when it's for real or not.
Most of the piano recordings I own I consider productions. A couple of them I consider as a recording of a piano. See the difference?
Guess you know it when you hear it.
Why do you think some of the early Decca recordings are so much sought after?
Rudy van Gelder's work for Blue Note?
Some of those Harmonia Mundi recordings done by one particular engineer?
They're popular because they're honest.
Minor flaws are easily forgiven when facing a work of art and that's what they are.
Art is also the passionate way you're defending yourself. For without passion there can't be art.
Whether that love is expressed through gold, silver or copper cable or a simple keyboard is not what's really irrelevant...
Cheers,
A few hundreds maybe more posts
earlier I tried to explain why I consider some recordings as my "references"(LP's),one was the Triple concerto(old EMI),and the other Duke Ellington/Johny Hodges "side by side"(Verve).Both very old recordings with amazing levels of "passion/art" captured,despite their not so "minor" faults.Some "accuracy protectors" here,didn't seem to agree with you.Let's see if they comment on your post now.So,yes I know the difference
Last edited:
Hmm, here I am on very much the same side of the boat as you, yet I find a lot to disagree with in your post.
Funny eh?
My system is pretty accurate, and is in a well treated room, but I do not hesitate for a second to change any recording I happen to be listening to at any given time by using eq on the fly. (via remote)
In fact I have about five or six 'standard' setting which go an awful long way in correcting generic problems...not enough bass (for MY taste), not enough bass and waaay too much mid and hi energy (very commonly needed that one, esp for 80's recordings. WHY are so many 80's recordings so frickin bright with no bass???
Maybe it was the speakers used for monitors back then??)Is it perfect? Of course not, but it can turn a horrible listening experience into something quite enjoyable.
Salt the dish to taste, I canna see much wrong with that.
The alternative is to be an audiophile with upturned nose and whinge and moan on audio forums 'oh woe, I find so many bad recordings blah blah blah' (not saying you do that markus-as I quoted you-but I laugh when I read those all too frequent posts on audio forums. The whole bloody point of an audio system is to play music you love and can enjoy, so why not do so??)
This (whining about quality), I must say, seems to mostly come from the 'measurement' camp rather than then other. 'I would rather hear what is actually on the recording so prefer an accurate system. It can be ruthlessly revealing on poor recordings but...' yada yada yada.
Me? I'll take both thankyou very much hahaha.
How come you respond to him, but completely ignore my direct question to you??
Maybe you have me on ignore. DOES DIY have an ignore button BTW??
How content are you with the protocol outlined for the test with Tom, and how comfortable are you that SY will be honest in the way he conducts the test. In other words, even tho you have had many problems with the DBTs of the past that have been referenced in this thread, will you accept the results of Toms test (even if he does hear differences) because you feel comfortable with it's procedure??
EDIT. maybe we should all nail our colours to the mast before the test takes place??
Barring any post test discoveries of actual procedural faults (not that it will happen, but for example left and right swapped, stupid stuff like that), I feel happy in accepting the results either way.
Ahh yes, but I prefer to call what I do 'accurately inaccurate'!
Or accurately coloured?Wow, did I miss a post somewhere?? Has Toms test been firmed up a little on the calendar? Excellent news, good luck to Tom and all concerned.
That is one possible reaction (among many), my personal reaction will be 'OK, so one person in a thousand CAN hear cable differences that are not explained by it's parameters as traditionally used, just how does that disprove my maxim that there are far far more important things in audio to worry about than cables?'
So while the crowd is milling around anxiously awaiting the 'start of the gig' (toms test), making small talk and cracking nervous silly jokes (some twit will post stupid pictures, always one in every crowd), all the while hoping the gig will live up to it's billing....I really AM interested in this talk of recording quality.
It also seem to be on topic in oh so many ways!
How many actually unlistenable recordings are there?? (unlistenable may have prejudiced the question, but you get what I mean?).
My experience is that basically, by far, the vast majority of recordings are great! I wonder if that is a genre thing somehow.
And what of this talk we often see...'the better the system, the fewer recordings you can play as you more easily hear poor recordings' vs 'the better the system, more and more recordings sound great'. (simplified statements there)
At times I have flip flopped from one to the other! so I analytically understand both.
I am now firmly and completely in the 'makes most recordings sound great' camp. In fact, my working hypothesis is that most recordings exceed the ability most systems to play them.
Rarely do I find a bad recording (one that cannot be rescued by judicious eq). I have come to the conclusion that the audiophile that whinges the most about how many bad recordings there are is actually (unknowingly) telling us how 'good' his system is. You know the guy, there are so many bad recordings that he only ever plays ten or so 'audiophile label' recordings, usually a single piano and unamplified female voice jazz thing hahaha.
Thro NIN on and the cones go spitting across the room. (only mucking about and exaggerating, but we have all met someone like that have we not??
)
Last edited:
Yes there are more important things in audio than cables.In fact only one thing is important for me and that is what comes out of the speakers.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.