I suppose knowing that you have £10000 of speaker cable snaking its way across the floor must put a bit of sparkle into anything you listen to.
I did some blind testing of speakercables a couple of years ago,
We tested audioquest cobalt, tara labs phase2 and a stax cable.
First we listened to all three cables without blindfold, and with blindfolds it was actually pretty easy to identify the cables.
Even my girlfriend who had never listened seriously to hi-fi could easily tell the difference.
We tested audioquest cobalt, tara labs phase2 and a stax cable.
First we listened to all three cables without blindfold, and with blindfolds it was actually pretty easy to identify the cables.
Even my girlfriend who had never listened seriously to hi-fi could easily tell the difference.
I've said this before elsewhere. Put a ferrite core around a cable and you hear a difference. Or you can do like Transparent Cable and add a cap and transistor and place it in a swank-looking box. If the latter actually makes a sonic difference, I wouldn't know. But even if they do, I wouldn't pay hundreds, much less thousands, for a few bucks of components. So I guess the ridiculous claims aren't the big problem. The astronomical mark-ups are.
When thinking about it, it's not really the cable manufacturers' fault. Transparent and the other guys know that nobody would care for a cable that costs €10. But if the same cable costs €1,000, even better, €10,000, then it HAS to be good.
When thinking about it, it's not really the cable manufacturers' fault. Transparent and the other guys know that nobody would care for a cable that costs €10. But if the same cable costs €1,000, even better, €10,000, then it HAS to be good.
Hi,
RESISTOR not transistor.
A simple correction network, one I doubt would work well in all systems. Especially those that have impedance correction networks on the amp's output or...better still, an impedance correction right across the speaker unit's terminals.
You think so?
Why not put some 1000 UKL notes around the system to give it some extra touch? A Midas touch perhaps..........
Cheers, 😉
RESISTOR not transistor.
A simple correction network, one I doubt would work well in all systems. Especially those that have impedance correction networks on the amp's output or...better still, an impedance correction right across the speaker unit's terminals.
You think so?
Why not put some 1000 UKL notes around the system to give it some extra touch? A Midas touch perhaps..........
Cheers, 😉
What have mark-ups got to do with anything? DO you have any idea what are the mark-ups of many supermarket type of goods? Are you boycotting them because of that? It's a market economy. Prices are only determined by what the market is ready to pay
Of course I meant a resistor. I've been told the design is called a zobel.
And of course everybody tries to make money. But I do draw the line somewhere. (I refuse work or assignments from big corporations, for example. I will not work for anyone that inhibits creativity, progress, life.) Like the $400 lacquered wood knob. Now, I don't believe any of the claims. I'm only making a general point here. And a decent company would just replace the bakelite knobs and pass the "improvement" on to its customers. That is what they call service. Not to mention that I basically exonerated the cable manufacturers.
And of course everybody tries to make money. But I do draw the line somewhere. (I refuse work or assignments from big corporations, for example. I will not work for anyone that inhibits creativity, progress, life.) Like the $400 lacquered wood knob. Now, I don't believe any of the claims. I'm only making a general point here. And a decent company would just replace the bakelite knobs and pass the "improvement" on to its customers. That is what they call service. Not to mention that I basically exonerated the cable manufacturers.
Peter M. said:
That's what happens when you concentrate on listening to the music.😎
But some people are just too biased about the looks/price of the gear, or nervous/afraid about being put to a test, or, worse, can't trust what they hear and on their ears.
If it's a distortion graph, they will blindly (pun intended) believe what they see and take their conclusions.
But the human vision is more easily fooled than the hearing.
Otherwise we couldn't watch TV at 25 frames per second.
What type of distortion do i advocate measuring?
Well: I am assuming here that an ideal cable would take the signal presented at one end and reproduce IDENTICALLY it at the other, regardless of what is going on in the surrounding environment, i.e. a completly transparent system (transfer function = 1). If this is a correct assumption, then any kind of distortion would mean that the cable was imperfect.
In practical terms, of course, some kinds of distortion are more audible than others. Given that every cable is going to introduce distortion of some description, and every cable will be susceptable to electromagnetic inteference, i suppose one must 'grade' distortion depending on its audibility - distortion outside the audible frequency would be less undesirable than audible frequency distortion. Also, 'sweet' sounding distortion (2 order harmonics) would probably be less undesirable than all other types.
When compairing two cables under test, if any difference was observed at all, it would probably be quite easy to rank one as better than another by compairing the distortion caused by each and considering the 'audibility' of the distortions.
Does that make any sense??
Well: I am assuming here that an ideal cable would take the signal presented at one end and reproduce IDENTICALLY it at the other, regardless of what is going on in the surrounding environment, i.e. a completly transparent system (transfer function = 1). If this is a correct assumption, then any kind of distortion would mean that the cable was imperfect.
In practical terms, of course, some kinds of distortion are more audible than others. Given that every cable is going to introduce distortion of some description, and every cable will be susceptable to electromagnetic inteference, i suppose one must 'grade' distortion depending on its audibility - distortion outside the audible frequency would be less undesirable than audible frequency distortion. Also, 'sweet' sounding distortion (2 order harmonics) would probably be less undesirable than all other types.
When compairing two cables under test, if any difference was observed at all, it would probably be quite easy to rank one as better than another by compairing the distortion caused by each and considering the 'audibility' of the distortions.
Does that make any sense??
Hi,
Well...You'll have a field day by just trying to arrive at some consensus on what actually is "audible frequency".
After that I think anyone can argue about "sweet" distortion too....Com'on, distortion is distortion, is it not?
No distortion of any kind should be desirable, there's enough of it already and I'm pretty sure standard measurements are missing a ton of them already rendering published specsheets rather errrr........ useless. 😀
Cheers, 😉
Well...You'll have a field day by just trying to arrive at some consensus on what actually is "audible frequency".
After that I think anyone can argue about "sweet" distortion too....Com'on, distortion is distortion, is it not?
No distortion of any kind should be desirable, there's enough of it already and I'm pretty sure standard measurements are missing a ton of them already rendering published specsheets rather errrr........ useless. 😀
Cheers, 😉
The only thing I will ever say about cables here
Well, of course all cables sound different. But...
D-O-E-S I-T M-A-T-T-E-R?
Get over it.
Well, of course all cables sound different. But...
D-O-E-S I-T M-A-T-T-E-R?
Get over it.
Bertles said:
It does make a lot of sense, in the sense (no pun intended) that it is a logical approach to trying to separate the voodoo from observable and repeatable phenomena.
But the reason that so far this hasn't worked is that it is pretty impossible to agree what is considered less or more objectionable distortion. So, there will be a lot of pressure to grade the cables on the basis of listening tests. Since listening tests (the non-double-blind ones) are totally unreliable, you end up with conflicting opinions that also conflict with what you measured in the first place.
The only time when listening tests do not end in a war is either when the participants agree beforehand to accept the results, or when one participant dominates the scene and all sheeps follow him. And in these cases, although you have consensus, the result is worth diddly.
It's an interesting world out there...
Jan Didden
I didn't read through all this several miles thread, so if repeating anything: My apollogies😉 Cables: wow! I wonder if you could ever make a realistic comparison??? The same with every piece of equipment you have in your stereo
If you had to make some kind of qualified judgement, you would have to compare it with the real thing, wouldn't you?? So, that would include listening to some real musicians and afterwards compaparing it to the same recorded music on your hifi
Would it ever sound the same? I do strongly doubt that. That leaves you where?? I really do not know, but I have to repeat this: If it sounds good, it has to be good🙂 Could anyone agree with that😉
Steen.
If you had to make some kind of qualified judgement, you would have to compare it with the real thing, wouldn't you?? So, that would include listening to some real musicians and afterwards compaparing it to the same recorded music on your hifi Would it ever sound the same? I do strongly doubt that. That leaves you where?? I really do not know, but I have to repeat this: If it sounds good, it has to be good🙂 Could anyone agree with that😉 Steen.
At least it is to you. Really. I'm sure that a music lover would pick the Sony PlayStation over anything Krell, Mark Levinson, whatever, in a blind test. The audiophile most likely wouldn't. And that's because the music lover listens to the music, while the audiophile listen for irregularities. The PlayStation is simply more musical, whereas the "high-end" gear has more detail and better separation. What is better is up to you. Subsequently, any "realistic comparison" would be decided by personal taste. Whatever is left is just hype and marketing and good business.
It is indeed an interesting world. I think the conclusion that can be drawn here is to simply listen to a few mid priced cables and pick your favourite, and not to loose any sleep over it.
Very good point steen: we reach a stage where you realise that everyone has a different expectation from a music system, and ultimately nothing is "best" because everyone wants different things. As phn pointed out, (though im not sure about the PlayStation example...) an audiophile is listening for irregularities. I suppose their ultimate system would reproduce the music exactly as it was when it was recorded (?). Other people might just want it to sound 'good' (whatever that is in their opinion), even if it sounds different from when it was recorded. Others still probably just want a block of walnut with some glowing tubes in the top for purely asthetic reasons.
Because I play musical instruments, I listen to the music itself, rather than the quality of the reproduction. Consequentially, i could listen to midi and still get something out of it.
Obviously any setup will have a technical specification, and on that one might be able to differentiate one system from another in terms of quality, but when you realise that preference is based on opinions, who cares about tech spec?
Why did i just write all that? It seems unnecessary. I must apologise; i have been drinking a lot of high caffine drinks lately.
Because I play musical instruments, I listen to the music itself, rather than the quality of the reproduction. Consequentially, i could listen to midi and still get something out of it.
Obviously any setup will have a technical specification, and on that one might be able to differentiate one system from another in terms of quality, but when you realise that preference is based on opinions, who cares about tech spec?
Why did i just write all that? It seems unnecessary. I must apologise; i have been drinking a lot of high caffine drinks lately.
Well, I used the PlayStation because I know it by name. I have heard cheap systems that were as good as just about anything I have ever heard. But I don't remember what they were. They were all older systems, though. And they didn't sound good because they were neutral. I don't think anyone would say the Thorens TD-160 is neutral, yet lots of people (me included) like it.
Hi guys,
Although now strictly about cables, I found a nice article on testing the audibility of a digital processor in the replay loop:
http://www.bostonaudiosociety.org/bas_speaker/abx_testing2.htm
The basic outcome is not very surprising for those who have followed the blind-sighted discussion. But a few things i think are noteworthy:
- the presence of the digital processor could reliably be detected when there was NO signal being reproduced. Why? Read it...
- because the test box switch-over relays were mounted in different positions, they made a different mechanical noise when operated, and there was some evidence that that could falsify the test. Special tests were done to try this out. So, indeed, we can hear very discriminatory!
- I admire the guts of Ivor Tiefenbrunn, Linn's founder and owner, to subject himself to this testing. I'm sure he also learned a few things!
Interesting reading on the john...
Jan Didden
Although now strictly about cables, I found a nice article on testing the audibility of a digital processor in the replay loop:
http://www.bostonaudiosociety.org/bas_speaker/abx_testing2.htm
The basic outcome is not very surprising for those who have followed the blind-sighted discussion. But a few things i think are noteworthy:
- the presence of the digital processor could reliably be detected when there was NO signal being reproduced. Why? Read it...
- because the test box switch-over relays were mounted in different positions, they made a different mechanical noise when operated, and there was some evidence that that could falsify the test. Special tests were done to try this out. So, indeed, we can hear very discriminatory!
- I admire the guts of Ivor Tiefenbrunn, Linn's founder and owner, to subject himself to this testing. I'm sure he also learned a few things!
Interesting reading on the john...
Jan Didden
Hey Jan,
Still discovering more deaf geezers? With Naim amps, no less. I also know a few, care to meet them?
That funny story probably marks Ivor's decision to finally get into digital
Still discovering more deaf geezers? With Naim amps, no less. I also know a few, care to meet them?
That funny story probably marks Ivor's decision to finally get into digital
janneman said:
Yes, and I know a guy from Linn that could teach many how to make an excellent blind and sighted test with very consistent results.
He goes talking about music, he goes making questions, he goes exemplifying, he goes pointing the aspects of the particular track.
In the end, some people that didn't know, have learned something about how to listen.
Very educative.
And very unbiased.
His name is Andreas, a german living in spain, the manager of Linn Iberia.
As I poined out plenty of times, besides the listeners, the one who makes the test has a big influence on the results.
It's not as simple as a guy switching sources.
Let's say that the guy who conducts a test has to be an experienced listener AND has to teach a room full of any kind of people on what to listen. To forget the gear, to concentrate on the music.
Maby this guy could teach Ivor some things.😀
- Status
- Not open for further replies.