So Cal. I take it you run your high quality CD player through to your amplifer using any old rubbish interconnects you can find at the local shopping centre. Then you run some awful old wire you dug up in a garbage bin to your wizz-bang speakers, right???
No I don't think you do.
At least be sensible enough to admit that BAD cable can be detrimental to sound quality!
From this point of view then it shouldn't be too much of a leap to see that improving your cable will make some improvement to the system (to a point).
This is not the same issue of whether cables can bring about massive improvements in an already good system.
Think about it........
No I don't think you do.
At least be sensible enough to admit that BAD cable can be detrimental to sound quality!
From this point of view then it shouldn't be too much of a leap to see that improving your cable will make some improvement to the system (to a point).
This is not the same issue of whether cables can bring about massive improvements in an already good system.
Think about it........
The entire concept of cables making an audible difference is based on pure horse manure if you cannot or will not hear a difference. None of the explanations i've ever heard holds any water and withstands any scrutiny. For some people this is a very strong argument that cables (provided they take voltage and current from point A to point B) cannot possibly be audible. Such presumed audibility threatens their entire belief system and as such has to be discarded on principle.
If i couldn't hear differences i'd also be laughing at the gullible and ignorant 'golden ears'.
Dear madinoz from the land of Oz,
Considering the level of opinion on this matter, I really should be careful how I express my opinion.
But it seems these poor thread always go the same way. Downhill.
They turn into peeing matches full of personal attacks. I was hoping to add a little lightness to the topic. I'm glad Carlos had fun with it too.
Dear analog_sa,
I think that was very well put.
Me? I have mid-grade interconnects.
I use 10 ga. high purity copper, 64 strand, high twist, speaker wire from Belden. I bought a 500 ft roll of it, so I guess I agree.
My bad.
Cal
Considering the level of opinion on this matter, I really should be careful how I express my opinion.
But it seems these poor thread always go the same way. Downhill.
They turn into peeing matches full of personal attacks. I was hoping to add a little lightness to the topic. I'm glad Carlos had fun with it too.
Dear analog_sa,
I think that was very well put.
Me? I have mid-grade interconnects.
I use 10 ga. high purity copper, 64 strand, high twist, speaker wire from Belden. I bought a 500 ft roll of it, so I guess I agree.
My bad.
Cal
Cal Weldon said:
That's what I meant.🙂
Guys, Christmas is here, and we are a family.
Or a club?
Whatever.
Let's all change the cables, OK?
ball games
please remember folks its a lot easier to throw than it is to catch, input output eh?
please remember folks its a lot easier to throw than it is to catch, input output eh?
bear said:
Since you did not adress my questions I take it as you realize that there are clear audible differences between cables..?
Your basis does not holds much water if you use that as a basis on the argument about cables all sound the same.. now which is it?
Hint, there are clear differences in audiocable performace, bot as measured and by listening tests. This is true for speaker cables, interconnects and power cables. I can´t see why anyone would want to argue against this fact, it´s just plain silly... really. 🙂
/Peter
I've read a few comparison studies (scientific and/or double blind ... not subjective) and the conclusion is always the same:
If you use a cable that is suited to the task (by professional standards, not 'audio/hi-fi' standards) then there will be no audible result.
What are 'pro' standards for audio then? They are close to the lowest order for signal transmission and few professionals would give it much thought.
Bandwidth: < 100kHz
Signal to Noise: < 100db
Distance: < 100' (usually)
If you want a challenge, try playing with signals in low MHz range... then look into GHz, and high data-rate transmission. Granted, many of these signals require a fairly low s/n ratio, but that generally scales with frequency. ie, if you can send 10MHz over 100' at 60db, then your noise rejection at 1MHz and 100Khz will be much higher. Either way, electrical signals (and analog) over wire is such a tired subject.
Differences can be measured, but they are so small as to be insignificant. You'd be MUCH better off spending ANY amount of time/money on your audio source, speakers, or room design then to ever consider serious money on cable.
I have never heard a plausible theory nor read a study that proved or suggested otherwise.
If anyone can find an electronics engineer (who has practical experience in signal transmission) to back up any of these cable-claims I would be very much surprised and eager to hear what he has to say.
(65 pages!?? ugh....)
If you use a cable that is suited to the task (by professional standards, not 'audio/hi-fi' standards) then there will be no audible result.
What are 'pro' standards for audio then? They are close to the lowest order for signal transmission and few professionals would give it much thought.
Bandwidth: < 100kHz
Signal to Noise: < 100db
Distance: < 100' (usually)
If you want a challenge, try playing with signals in low MHz range... then look into GHz, and high data-rate transmission. Granted, many of these signals require a fairly low s/n ratio, but that generally scales with frequency. ie, if you can send 10MHz over 100' at 60db, then your noise rejection at 1MHz and 100Khz will be much higher. Either way, electrical signals (and analog) over wire is such a tired subject.
Differences can be measured, but they are so small as to be insignificant. You'd be MUCH better off spending ANY amount of time/money on your audio source, speakers, or room design then to ever consider serious money on cable.
I have never heard a plausible theory nor read a study that proved or suggested otherwise.
If anyone can find an electronics engineer (who has practical experience in signal transmission) to back up any of these cable-claims I would be very much surprised and eager to hear what he has to say.
(65 pages!?? ugh....)
Sixty five pages. Hehehehe. I've resisited the temptation to this point. But I'll tell an anecdote.
My boss is a self-styled golden ear audiophile. He has groups over to his house who listen to stereo components and comment on them like wine connoisseurs at a tasting. He was suitably impressed by the Lynn Olson Ariels in my office. But he buys amps with huge bottles, power conditioners, and all sorts of expensive stuff, so it was hard for me to take the compliments gracefully.
One time he was selling some "audiophile grade" interconnects, planning to "upgrade." I told him that he could not tell the difference between the "best" interconnects and the cheapest you could buy at Radio Shack -- and that I could prove it. He snorted at the idea, naturally. Next I asked if speaker cable was supposed to change the sound relative to a short, direct connection. No, of course not he said. Okay.
So I did the following. I took a cheap 6 foot stereo cable from Radio Shack and looped it from the tape monitor input to tape monitor source on the Rotel RA-02 on my desk. I was then able to switch the cables in and out, alternating between the cheap cables and a direct connection.
After only a few minutes he had to admit he could hear absolutely no difference at all. In fact, if I switched quickly he could not even tell I had switched the cheap cables in or out.
Yes, I still have my job. Thanks for asking.
My boss is a self-styled golden ear audiophile. He has groups over to his house who listen to stereo components and comment on them like wine connoisseurs at a tasting. He was suitably impressed by the Lynn Olson Ariels in my office. But he buys amps with huge bottles, power conditioners, and all sorts of expensive stuff, so it was hard for me to take the compliments gracefully.
One time he was selling some "audiophile grade" interconnects, planning to "upgrade." I told him that he could not tell the difference between the "best" interconnects and the cheapest you could buy at Radio Shack -- and that I could prove it. He snorted at the idea, naturally. Next I asked if speaker cable was supposed to change the sound relative to a short, direct connection. No, of course not he said. Okay.
So I did the following. I took a cheap 6 foot stereo cable from Radio Shack and looped it from the tape monitor input to tape monitor source on the Rotel RA-02 on my desk. I was then able to switch the cables in and out, alternating between the cheap cables and a direct connection.
After only a few minutes he had to admit he could hear absolutely no difference at all. In fact, if I switched quickly he could not even tell I had switched the cheap cables in or out.
Yes, I still have my job. Thanks for asking.
Well thats a good example but...
On your bosses $40,000 Hifi stereo, it is probably sensitive and accurate enough to hear the differences in cables. In contrast, your Rotel, which probably cost less than one set of his interconnects, is not sensitive enough make the differences distinguishable.
I have a bunch of recordings that sounded great on my old mid-fi Marantz system. Now if I play those same tracks on my new $$ Hifi they sound like crap.
This is all subjective of course but I belive the whole system (that includes amp, speakers, cables and ears) will dictate whether you can hear a difference in cables or not.
The What HiFi 30% rule applies. Spend about 30% of your total system cost on cables, any more and your wasting your money. I belive what they mean is that any more than 30% on cables will not show any improvements due to the fidelity of a system of a specified level.
On the other side of the coin, there are alot of snake oil salesmen out there in the Hifi world. Trust *your* ears, and remeber what you might not be able to hear, somebody else might.
On your bosses $40,000 Hifi stereo, it is probably sensitive and accurate enough to hear the differences in cables. In contrast, your Rotel, which probably cost less than one set of his interconnects, is not sensitive enough make the differences distinguishable.
I have a bunch of recordings that sounded great on my old mid-fi Marantz system. Now if I play those same tracks on my new $$ Hifi they sound like crap.
This is all subjective of course but I belive the whole system (that includes amp, speakers, cables and ears) will dictate whether you can hear a difference in cables or not.
The What HiFi 30% rule applies. Spend about 30% of your total system cost on cables, any more and your wasting your money. I belive what they mean is that any more than 30% on cables will not show any improvements due to the fidelity of a system of a specified level.
On the other side of the coin, there are alot of snake oil salesmen out there in the Hifi world. Trust *your* ears, and remeber what you might not be able to hear, somebody else might.
Actually, the 30% rule should be more like:
1. Spend 30% on electronics (cables should make up 5% of that)
2. Spend 30% on speakers
3. Spend 30% on the room
... and the rest??? Some good recordings !! 🙂
The best cables you can get are most likely made by Belden or one of the other wire manufacturers. Expect to spend from $0.20 to $5.00 a meter (there abouts??)
1. Spend 30% on electronics (cables should make up 5% of that)
2. Spend 30% on speakers
3. Spend 30% on the room
... and the rest??? Some good recordings !! 🙂
The best cables you can get are most likely made by Belden or one of the other wire manufacturers. Expect to spend from $0.20 to $5.00 a meter (there abouts??)
Dave Jones said:
I'll see that anecdote and post this one. I did the same sort of pseudo-blind test, except in some ways it was as blind as possible in that:
- the subject didn't know a test was taking place
- wasn't prompted for a reaction or questioned
- had no knowledge whatsoever of hi-fi or electronics
- had no knowledge of audiophile terminology
- at best knew I owned a stereo
My girlfriend at the time and I were reading while listening to music on the couch - vinyl of Roxy Music's Avalon as I recall - when without disrupting her reading I went to the equipment rack, lifted the tonearm, quickly swapped out the cables at the back hidden from view between the phono pre and the passive control unit, lowered the arm and sat down to my book again. Within a minute she asked what I'ld done because the sound was now "crisper" and more "tingly". I'ld replaced homemade PBJ-style braids with spiral wrapped Litz over Telfon tube, interconnects I always considered bright.
No less anecdotal true, so I think we've just anec-totally cancelled each other out.
Yes, she's long gone. Thanks as well! 🙂
Hi Guys,
65 pages on, do cables make a difference, simply amazing. Since the cables are connecting two dynamic components it would make sense that different types of cables would sound differntly depending on the capacitance, length and inductance of said cable.
Another variable thats always left out in these dicussions is room interactions. Room interaction is the biggest variable when it comes to home audio. People do many interesting things to help with room problems. One of the most common is to use cables as filter to lesson problems caused by room interaction with the speakers used in that room.
If someone goes out and spends a large sum of money on cables, are they going to admit that their system sounds worse? Not likely! They are going to say that its the best sound that the ever had. The cables need a long time to break in or that person being critical can't hear. Of course cables make a huge diffrence. We've all done it.
Do cables make a diffrence? From my experiance they do. But its not just a cable issue. Its a system and room interaction.
Andy
65 pages on, do cables make a difference, simply amazing. Since the cables are connecting two dynamic components it would make sense that different types of cables would sound differntly depending on the capacitance, length and inductance of said cable.
Another variable thats always left out in these dicussions is room interactions. Room interaction is the biggest variable when it comes to home audio. People do many interesting things to help with room problems. One of the most common is to use cables as filter to lesson problems caused by room interaction with the speakers used in that room.
If someone goes out and spends a large sum of money on cables, are they going to admit that their system sounds worse? Not likely! They are going to say that its the best sound that the ever had. The cables need a long time to break in or that person being critical can't hear. Of course cables make a huge diffrence. We've all done it.
Do cables make a diffrence? From my experiance they do. But its not just a cable issue. Its a system and room interaction.
Andy
MartinQ;
"I've read a few comparison studies (scientific and/or double blind ... not subjective) and the conclusion is always the same:
If you use a cable that is suited to the task (by professional standards, not 'audio/hi-fi' standards) then there will be no audible result. "
Then you haven´t been reading enough. Cause there are studies, and articles that says otherwise.
"Differences can be measured, but they are so small as to be insignificant. You'd be MUCH better off spending ANY amount of time/money on your audio source, speakers, or room design then to ever consider serious money on cable. "
Differences can be measured and heard, and are "significant". Putting most of the money and effort on speakers and room is a good idea though.
"I have never heard a plausible theory nor read a study that proved or suggested otherwise."
Read some more then if you´r interested in learning more and find the truth about this old horse. Start with Hawksford and Duncans work. Read the Hifi+ article from last issue.
"If anyone can find an electronics engineer (who has practical experience in signal transmission) to back up any of these cable-claims I would be very much surprised and eager to hear what he has to say."
See above. Also realise there are EE´s that have porr understanding on how things work, I´ve experienced some scary examples.
"Actually, the 30% rule should be more like:
1. Spend 30% on electronics (cables should make up 5% of that)
2. Spend 30% on speakers
3. Spend 30% on the room"
This sounds like a good advice.
"The best cables you can get are most likely made by Belden or one of the other wire manufacturers. Expect to spend from $0.20 to $5.00 a meter (there abouts??)"
How can a cable be "best" if at the same time differences in cables is non existant? I agree though that the amount of $ you mention is about what you should spend on a cable and not much more. Clean sounding cables does not have to be expensive.
/Peter
"I've read a few comparison studies (scientific and/or double blind ... not subjective) and the conclusion is always the same:
If you use a cable that is suited to the task (by professional standards, not 'audio/hi-fi' standards) then there will be no audible result. "
Then you haven´t been reading enough. Cause there are studies, and articles that says otherwise.
"Differences can be measured, but they are so small as to be insignificant. You'd be MUCH better off spending ANY amount of time/money on your audio source, speakers, or room design then to ever consider serious money on cable. "
Differences can be measured and heard, and are "significant". Putting most of the money and effort on speakers and room is a good idea though.
"I have never heard a plausible theory nor read a study that proved or suggested otherwise."
Read some more then if you´r interested in learning more and find the truth about this old horse. Start with Hawksford and Duncans work. Read the Hifi+ article from last issue.
"If anyone can find an electronics engineer (who has practical experience in signal transmission) to back up any of these cable-claims I would be very much surprised and eager to hear what he has to say."
See above. Also realise there are EE´s that have porr understanding on how things work, I´ve experienced some scary examples.
"Actually, the 30% rule should be more like:
1. Spend 30% on electronics (cables should make up 5% of that)
2. Spend 30% on speakers
3. Spend 30% on the room"
This sounds like a good advice.
"The best cables you can get are most likely made by Belden or one of the other wire manufacturers. Expect to spend from $0.20 to $5.00 a meter (there abouts??)"
How can a cable be "best" if at the same time differences in cables is non existant? I agree though that the amount of $ you mention is about what you should spend on a cable and not much more. Clean sounding cables does not have to be expensive.
/Peter
Look here's the bottom line...
(please ignore this post, Pan...) 🙂
Most systems are not put together by "signal engineers" and the components are not designed by "signal engineers". And, even if the components were designed by same, there are no standards so a random configuration (your system) would not be assured of proper matches.
So, what do we have here?
We have virtually everyone who doesn't *build their own gear* AND know something about *signal engineering* with a conglomeration of essentially random elements. Which then have to be connected together - with the goal (allegedly) to produce "blameless" (to borrow Doug Self's term) or "accurate" sound.
Clearly, if the inputs and outputs of gear was designed to be balanced and Low Z, the *effects* of cables would be reduced greatly, perhaps to the point of insignificance. But, without this set up, there are the nominal L,C, & R effects which are likely the *primary* effect.
Now, with respect to speaker cables, again we have a NON STANDARD interface. The amp being a large variable (do we have to debate this?) and the speaker being a monster variable which then reflects it's reactances back to the amp... so again L,C & R are the primary factors.
The only question that still needs any debate at all is if cables of identical design, construction and materials except for any ONE SINGLE factor can cause an audible or measurable difference - with the emphasis on audible.
For example if I make two interconnects that are identical except for the insulating material, or the type of metal, or the number of strands, or going from stranded to solid core. These are examples of elements that do NOT effect L,C, or R in what would on the surface appear to be a meaningful (indeed usually changing any ONE of these factors would make for a difficult to measure electrical difference) audible difference or not.
And, CLEARLY, with some combinations of gear, all or some of the gear is sufficiently masking or high in inherent non-linearlity or distortions as to make changing these last factors completely and totally meaningless and moot. In other words, making these changes inaudible, no matter if they could be heard under the proper conditions or not.
There is no doubt that high quality cables can be made or bought at low prices. Price is a non-issue.
There is no doubt that some expensive cables DO affect the sound because of reasonably significant L, C & R values, which given the variables of the equipment interface can yield quite variable changes or lack thereof in any given system. Some cheap cables can do the very same thing. (the wire and the electrons don't know if they are expensive or not)
For many people it simply doesn't matter what cables they use.
For some people they do hear a difference, and use that to attempt to "tune" or "dial in" their system... as noted above the usual causes.
To go at this with some sort of fanatic fervor seems silly to me.
At this time there is no clear reason to expect of believe that any one of the individual factors being changed in otherwise identical cables ought to be audible. At this time there are no definitive or even reasonably dispositive tests or studies that have been carried out. No one knows for sure. Something may be going on, but it is still unclear, unlikely, but possible.
This is the *only* issue that I can see that is still open to any debate on the cable topic.
And, as I noted, for a vast majority of audiophiles systems this issue is completely moot and meaningless - thus the vast gulf of personal experiences and opinions.
You want to talk about something? Talk about how to set up such a test with only one factor being changed and with the exemplary test conditions to yield a meaningful result. (let's not claim that this has been done to date... save time here)
_-_-bear
(please ignore this post, Pan...) 🙂
Most systems are not put together by "signal engineers" and the components are not designed by "signal engineers". And, even if the components were designed by same, there are no standards so a random configuration (your system) would not be assured of proper matches.
So, what do we have here?
We have virtually everyone who doesn't *build their own gear* AND know something about *signal engineering* with a conglomeration of essentially random elements. Which then have to be connected together - with the goal (allegedly) to produce "blameless" (to borrow Doug Self's term) or "accurate" sound.
Clearly, if the inputs and outputs of gear was designed to be balanced and Low Z, the *effects* of cables would be reduced greatly, perhaps to the point of insignificance. But, without this set up, there are the nominal L,C, & R effects which are likely the *primary* effect.
Now, with respect to speaker cables, again we have a NON STANDARD interface. The amp being a large variable (do we have to debate this?) and the speaker being a monster variable which then reflects it's reactances back to the amp... so again L,C & R are the primary factors.
The only question that still needs any debate at all is if cables of identical design, construction and materials except for any ONE SINGLE factor can cause an audible or measurable difference - with the emphasis on audible.
For example if I make two interconnects that are identical except for the insulating material, or the type of metal, or the number of strands, or going from stranded to solid core. These are examples of elements that do NOT effect L,C, or R in what would on the surface appear to be a meaningful (indeed usually changing any ONE of these factors would make for a difficult to measure electrical difference) audible difference or not.
And, CLEARLY, with some combinations of gear, all or some of the gear is sufficiently masking or high in inherent non-linearlity or distortions as to make changing these last factors completely and totally meaningless and moot. In other words, making these changes inaudible, no matter if they could be heard under the proper conditions or not.
There is no doubt that high quality cables can be made or bought at low prices. Price is a non-issue.
There is no doubt that some expensive cables DO affect the sound because of reasonably significant L, C & R values, which given the variables of the equipment interface can yield quite variable changes or lack thereof in any given system. Some cheap cables can do the very same thing. (the wire and the electrons don't know if they are expensive or not)
For many people it simply doesn't matter what cables they use.
For some people they do hear a difference, and use that to attempt to "tune" or "dial in" their system... as noted above the usual causes.
To go at this with some sort of fanatic fervor seems silly to me.
At this time there is no clear reason to expect of believe that any one of the individual factors being changed in otherwise identical cables ought to be audible. At this time there are no definitive or even reasonably dispositive tests or studies that have been carried out. No one knows for sure. Something may be going on, but it is still unclear, unlikely, but possible.
This is the *only* issue that I can see that is still open to any debate on the cable topic.
And, as I noted, for a vast majority of audiophiles systems this issue is completely moot and meaningless - thus the vast gulf of personal experiences and opinions.
You want to talk about something? Talk about how to set up such a test with only one factor being changed and with the exemplary test conditions to yield a meaningful result. (let's not claim that this has been done to date... save time here)
_-_-bear
price
yes,
however i wouldn't agree price is a none
there was a person who built a state of the art amp and tried to sell it for component cost doubled, about £100 at the time.
guess what ? no one bought it. a business person was consulted to fathom the answer, he said sound wise it should be $3000, so ask $4000 and give a discount. it worked.
daft eh?
yes,
however i wouldn't agree price is a none
there was a person who built a state of the art amp and tried to sell it for component cost doubled, about £100 at the time.
guess what ? no one bought it. a business person was consulted to fathom the answer, he said sound wise it should be $3000, so ask $4000 and give a discount. it worked.
daft eh?
"(please ignore this post, Pan...) "
How could I.. 🙂
"And, CLEARLY, with some combinations of gear, all or some of the gear is sufficiently masking or high in inherent non-linearlity or distortions as to make changing these last factors completely and totally meaningless and moot. In other words, making these changes inaudible, no matter if they could be heard under the proper conditions or not."
Making this assumption is wrong IMO. The masking effect is not anywhere as big as you suggest... in some/many situations.
"There is no doubt that high quality cables can be made or bought at low prices. Price is a non-issue."
Absolutely.
"For many people it simply doesn't matter what cables they use."
For most I´d say.
"For some people they do hear a difference, and use that to attempt to "tune" or "dial in" their system... as noted above the usual causes.
To go at this with some sort of fanatic fervor seems silly to me. "
To me also.
"At this time there is no clear reason to expect of believe that any one of the individual factors being changed in otherwise identical cables ought to be audible."
Well obviously the more the cables are similar, the less chance of a difference being audible.
"This is the *only* issue that I can see that is still open to any debate on the cable topic."
Kind off agree.
"And, as I noted, for a vast majority of audiophiles systems this issue is completely moot and meaningless - thus the vast gulf of personal experiences and opinions."
Absolutely agree!
"You want to talk about something? Talk about how to set up such a test with only one factor being changed and with the exemplary test conditions to yield a meaningful result. (let's not claim that this has been done to date... save time here)"
Actually I have at several times sh.... naaah! just kidding 😉
I know people though that swear of simple round solid core copper sounds better with air/cotton instead of PVC. I tried the concept against a Supra Ply (lamp cord type), and prefered the solid core. Of course just about every parameter was changed so that does not answer your question, but it was short runs (1-2) meter to speakers, and was the first time I heared a difference between cables. I had been a "no believer" sort of during years before that, and became a believer in that moment. I do not sweat the cable thing though but get ****ed when uneducated people say it´s imagination, since it´s clearly not.
/Peter
How could I.. 🙂
"And, CLEARLY, with some combinations of gear, all or some of the gear is sufficiently masking or high in inherent non-linearlity or distortions as to make changing these last factors completely and totally meaningless and moot. In other words, making these changes inaudible, no matter if they could be heard under the proper conditions or not."
Making this assumption is wrong IMO. The masking effect is not anywhere as big as you suggest... in some/many situations.
"There is no doubt that high quality cables can be made or bought at low prices. Price is a non-issue."
Absolutely.
"For many people it simply doesn't matter what cables they use."
For most I´d say.
"For some people they do hear a difference, and use that to attempt to "tune" or "dial in" their system... as noted above the usual causes.
To go at this with some sort of fanatic fervor seems silly to me. "
To me also.
"At this time there is no clear reason to expect of believe that any one of the individual factors being changed in otherwise identical cables ought to be audible."
Well obviously the more the cables are similar, the less chance of a difference being audible.
"This is the *only* issue that I can see that is still open to any debate on the cable topic."
Kind off agree.
"And, as I noted, for a vast majority of audiophiles systems this issue is completely moot and meaningless - thus the vast gulf of personal experiences and opinions."
Absolutely agree!
"You want to talk about something? Talk about how to set up such a test with only one factor being changed and with the exemplary test conditions to yield a meaningful result. (let's not claim that this has been done to date... save time here)"
Actually I have at several times sh.... naaah! just kidding 😉
I know people though that swear of simple round solid core copper sounds better with air/cotton instead of PVC. I tried the concept against a Supra Ply (lamp cord type), and prefered the solid core. Of course just about every parameter was changed so that does not answer your question, but it was short runs (1-2) meter to speakers, and was the first time I heared a difference between cables. I had been a "no believer" sort of during years before that, and became a believer in that moment. I do not sweat the cable thing though but get ****ed when uneducated people say it´s imagination, since it´s clearly not.
/Peter
Pan, can you make it a little easier for me and tell me more about Hawksford and Duncans? Is there a paper or book they released? Date? Title? Publisher? Thanks (feeling lazy).
As far as magazines go, I feel they are mostly rubbish (with some very nice pictures and too much advertising) .... aside from The Audio Critic. That is the only magazine I will spend money on as they are rational in thought, and backup their claims with actual measurements or explanation from engineers.
HiFi+ ? What issue? I'll see if I can find it in the local store and give it a browse.
Even though my religion suggests otherwise.... I am spending time & energy discussing AUDIO cable. Even VIDIO broadcast cable (analog) is a lame-duck topic.
Ugh..... let us continue then?
As far as magazines go, I feel they are mostly rubbish (with some very nice pictures and too much advertising) .... aside from The Audio Critic. That is the only magazine I will spend money on as they are rational in thought, and backup their claims with actual measurements or explanation from engineers.
HiFi+ ? What issue? I'll see if I can find it in the local store and give it a browse.
Even though my religion suggests otherwise.... I am spending time & energy discussing AUDIO cable. Even VIDIO broadcast cable (analog) is a lame-duck topic.
Ugh..... let us continue then?
Have you spent time and effort listening to cables?
I really don't believe that you'll come across a plausible explanation, especially not in the latest issue of some adverising mag 🙂 Everything that is measurable or predicted by theory is many orders of magnitude below of what is officially considered the threshold of audibility.
bear said:
But what do you consider "the original"?
If you consider the original to be the recording itself, then the quest for the objectively perfect audio system (i.e one which does not alter the recording in any way, size, shape, or for) is rather a fool's errand.
Every recording ever made was recorded, monitored, mixed, and mastered while listening through a set of "filters." From the microphones to the loudspeakers.
And it was while listening through all these filters that those responsible for the recording made their decisions as to what they desired the end result to sound like.
So whether you consider the original to be the original event, the recording itself, or the intent of those who produced the recording, to reproduce the recording itself with objective perfection is to reproduce something which has no particular context to either the original event or the intent of those who produced it.
That's your paradox. And why I think the obsession with objective perfection on the reproduction side is rather silly.
Of course there's no way we could reproduce every recording using the same filters used when it was made unless we're making our own recordings, so I think the best approach is to give up the obsession with objective perfection and for each individual to use whatever filters give them the most pleasing results with the most recordings.
se
bear said:
Piece of cake.
I have two cables here of identical design, construction and materials except for ONE single factor. One of the cables is cut in two. 😀
se
- Status
- Not open for further replies.