Utter rubbish. Any cable that has such an effect that it can chosen to be used for different genres of music is a glorified tone control and as such has NOTHING to do with accurate replay.Andre Visser said:
Come on, give us a good technical reason why your statement should be considered. Note: technical.
Brett said:
For synthesized and amplified music, accuracy is not that important because you have no idea what the original sound was supposed to sound like, while with acoustical instruments you have a better idea of what sound you expect to hear from the system.
Technical enough?
OK, so you adjust the final 'tune' of your system based upon acoustic reference recordings*, to get the best possible replay fidelity. Then you introduce synthesised recordings into this system. What the hell difference are the cables going to make?Andre Visser said:
* A delusion at best as you were not there at the recording and connot possibly KNOW what the exact tone of the instruments were on the day at the mic position, nor even in the monitoring room, nor what other modificaations to the original signal were made by the producer/engineer.
There was nothing technical in your response at all. What parameters, construction or other cable parameters create such large electrical effects that they can repeatedly be selected for tonal properties?Andre Visser said:
Read some of the other fora and there are weirdos who do this, also carefully elevating their prize wires off the floor one similaly expensive cable 'elevators'.tc-60guy said:
I can't believe this type of discussion takes place in an advanced technical forum such as diyAudio. 
If that is correct, then as long as the cables do not cause bit errors in the transfer, most performance issues depend on what happens when the bits are received. That is where the design issues should be focused.fizzard said:
Siltech¡I😀tc-60guy said:
Oh yes, someone once tried Siltech power cables on an NCD amp. It turned out pretty bad. The oridinaty thick power cables for power tooling was much better. This is a good example showing expensive is not always the better.
I think for analog signals, there are lots more involved than what meets the eye. There will be people that accept various technology, some will fight it to death, some don't care, each have their own reasons, so it really doesn't matter who's right or wrong.
Not enough "real" cable designers that participate.bastek said:I can't believe this type of discussion takes place in an advanced technical forum such as diyAudio.
My 10 cents worth.
I'm sure there are minute effects that audio cables offer to the signal carried by it but am I correct in saying that they are measured in 'parts per million'?
These only really come into their own in high frequency (Radio) signals.
If that is correct there are far bigger problems to worry about.
Amplifiers, disk players etc are far more complex and there is more room to go wrong there.
Striving for perfection is admirable but engineering requires compromise, what you gain here you loose a little there so is perfection attainable and will cables make a difference?
I personally think that if you have paid alot of money for your cables you will tell yourself they sound good for fear of feeling foolish for spending all that cash.
Marketing is to blame I think.
Cheers,
Carl
😉
I'm sure there are minute effects that audio cables offer to the signal carried by it but am I correct in saying that they are measured in 'parts per million'?
These only really come into their own in high frequency (Radio) signals.
If that is correct there are far bigger problems to worry about.
Amplifiers, disk players etc are far more complex and there is more room to go wrong there.
Striving for perfection is admirable but engineering requires compromise, what you gain here you loose a little there so is perfection attainable and will cables make a difference?
I personally think that if you have paid alot of money for your cables you will tell yourself they sound good for fear of feeling foolish for spending all that cash.
Marketing is to blame I think.
Cheers,
Carl
😉
Greetings Dynsdale, I agree. If you just droped five grand on gormet cables, you don't want to feel like a shnook so you hear a vast improvment in the sound of your system. If you realy want to change the sound of your system in concrete,measurable terms, upgrade your speakers as they remain, to this day, the weakest link in the chain.
It's a fact of marketing research that middle to late-middle aged men with a technical background, including engineering, are more likely to fall for the pseudo-science techno babble claims of marketers.
Another subtle principle of marketing is that the marketing doesn't have to be deliberate. In other words: the marketer might actually believe the claims, even though they may be completely false.
These two ideas apply well to the boutique cable industy, and to high end audio in general. Quite frankly it's nothing to be sickened about, our economy relies on stupidity more than it does on oil.
Another subtle principle of marketing is that the marketing doesn't have to be deliberate. In other words: the marketer might actually believe the claims, even though they may be completely false.
These two ideas apply well to the boutique cable industy, and to high end audio in general. Quite frankly it's nothing to be sickened about, our economy relies on stupidity more than it does on oil.
Andre Visser said:
it is quite a challenge to hear music from a loudspaker without amplification
But maybe with the right cables...
Conrad Hoffman said:
Brett said:
So the obvious conclusion is that tri-amping turns one's system into unrevealing mid-fi and/or creates a deafened careless listener.
Or am I missing something?
cheers,
AJ
Yes. The obvious conclusion is the tiny effects of cables are reduced even further by multiamping.AJinFLA said:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.