I don't believe cables make a difference, any input?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#3,361
SY said:
Single listener tests are a different kettle of fish than the mass-slaughters perpetrated by Stereophile.

If my goal is to test the claims of "easy to hear" from a particular individual regarding a particular variable, then the tests don't have to be terribly fancy. .
Click to expand...

Of course "terribly fancy" isn´t that easy to use as a qualifier. But, normally agreed to that, as i wouldn´t describe doing some training as fancy. 🙂

But the underlying assumption of your point of view seems to be, that first a really audible (i.e. means bigger) difference has to be heard in a blind test by everyone at a first attempt, if this listeners thinks to hear a difference sighted and
second, a difference not detected in this sort of blind test isn´t of practical relevance.

Do i understand your position right in this regard?

In both points there is strong evidence that one can´t be sure of that.
To the first, if the stimulus is percepted differently, then according to your proposed test scheme, a listener has to make a decision whether this difference is a presentation difference of just a perception difference.
If the listener is not used to do that just by listening the chance to fail is quite high.

Normal cure is training under blind test listening conditions and knowing the sound and the music samples very well.

And normally there should be a positive control to be sure that a listener has reached a sufficient level of sensitivity.

Listening under blind test conditions isn´t the same as listening under normal (sighted) conditions, it is certain respect a lot more difficult.
 
#3,362
dzzmiller said:


"Is the a correlation between cable cost and listener preference?". or the statement

"Listeners prefer more expensive cables" or better "At the same volume, listeners prefer more expensive cables".
Click to expand...

Hello Again dzzmiller!

If you had asked me this question a couple of months again I would have answered it like this: In general, although there are always exceptions, the more expensive cables will usually sound better! Now the problem was why did the more expensive cables sound better? Was it because they were better constructed or did manufacturers just build different types of cables, listen to them and simply charge more for those that sounded the best? That was the question I usually pondered concerning wires.

All that changed when my friend Mike R. began DIYing his own cables. Mike won't tell me how he makes them but his cables are the best I've ever heard and my system now uses them exclusively. I replaced my Nordost BlueHeaven speaker wires and my Z-Squared Au/Au IC's ---{these ICs use a gold/silver/copper alloy that's 24K gold plated}--- with Mike's speaker wires and IC's and I've never been happier.

I don't know what it cost Mike to make them but I don't believe they're outrageously expensive. Heck they might not even expensive at all. I honestly don't know. That said I'd put them against any cable on the market bar none. Here's where the question of price gets tricky. If Mike R decided to become a cable manufacturer should he test his cables against other cables and charge a price that's slightly more than the most expensive cables they beat sonically or should he just figure what he's invested in time and money a charge a price that provides a decent profit?

Let's say people listen to them and the general consesus is they sound better than a $4K set of ICs. Should he then charge $4K even if they only cost $100 to build because they're sonically better than $4K ICs? What if he only charged $200 for his ICs would anyone believe they could sonically better the $4K ICs at such a price? I guess it all comes down to my original question: Are more expensive cables better constructed or do manufacturers just charge more for those cables that sound the best?

Thetubeguy1954
 
#3,365
thetubeguy1954 said:


If Mike R decided to become a cable manufacturer should he test his cables against other cables and charge a price that's slightly more than the most expensive cables they beat sonically or should he just figure what he's invested in time and money a charge a price that provides a decent profit?
Click to expand...


I dont know about his cables
But he would most likely have to make some cosmetic changes
Changes that may actually compromise their sound quality :smash:
 
#3,366
audio-kraut said:
... I will refrain from disturbing your circles again.
Click to expand...

Start with a personal definition of a common word, discard obvious data which counters it (for example the number of music reviews in Stereophile, their music releases, or contributors with musical backgrounds or pursuits), use your new delimited definition as a cudgel to argue a superior grasp on reality, claim authority from science. Oddly, that bothers me more than 'pebbles'.
 
#3,367
SY said:
Wow, night and day. And specifically that brand. And all the cables of that brand sound night and day different from one another. And the differences in the speaker wire are unbelievable.

That must have been some salesman doing the demo!
Click to expand...

Believe it or not. I swear by it. I have sensitive electronics and loudspeakers that can pick up differences. And the salesman was not there at the time. He just dropped off the demo kit and I sampled myself.

Nordost solved the problem of data transfer into the processors of IBM's 4 quadcore processor supercomputers. The wires they used prior could not transfer the data fast enough and would slow down the computing time. Using the same technology as the speaker cables, they solved the problem.

I enjoy them quite a bit. They also make interconnects which also make a noticeable difference in sonics.
 
#3,369
"Nordost solved the problem of data transfer into the processors of IBM's 4 quadcore processor supercomputers. The wires they used prior could not transfer the data fast enough and would slow down the computing time. Using the same technology as the speaker cables, they solved the problem. "

And that is a perfect Mandy Rice-Davis ! If you beleive that Marketing BS, don't expect anyone to take your opinions seriously!


"I think computers actually have a measurable gain in performance and stability when you use precious metals like gold. "

Measurable gain of what compared with what?
 
#3,372
cliff said:
"Nordost solved the problem of data transfer into the processors of IBM's 4 quadcore processor supercomputers. The wires they used prior could not transfer the data fast enough and would slow down the computing time. Using the same technology as the speaker cables, they solved the problem. "
Click to expand...

The important "wires" are now glass and make very poor speaker cables.
 
#3,375
scott wurcer said:


The important "wires" are now glass and make very poor speaker cables.
Click to expand...

Please don't confuse us with facts. Have you tried fiber speaker wires? I didn't think so. It just takes a lot of voltage..........and maybe those blocks that lift the wire of the floor. And rocks. Wet rocks. Lets make te rocks iron ore..........
 
#3,380
audio-kraut said:
If you call yourself an audiophile - that is your problem.
Click to expand...

Certainly not a problem for me.

There is no "usual" definition.
Click to expand...
Humpty Dumptyism. An old and tired debate.
(please see Through the Looking-Glass, and What Alice Found There)

- maybe I have too long indulged in "stereophile" and show allergic reactions.
Click to expand...
I think that may be the problem right there!

I will refrain from disturbing your circles again.
Click to expand...

Hey, as long as you keep it technical, no worries.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom