cabels sound different . . . . not becaue of some black magic 7 9's b.s. but because th e cable parameters are different. And if the cable paramters ar e different (same amp and sam speaker assumed), then there might be a legitimate case for saying one can hear the differences when the cables are swapped because of the interaction between the amplifeir and the load.
Of course, whether one believes that the audible differences are that great is a personal matter. Probably audible on a really high end system, but then, moving the speakers, the listening position by a few feet, or a piece of furniutre in the room would also make as big a difference.\
Of course, whether one believes that the audible differences are that great is a personal matter. Probably audible on a really high end system, but then, moving the speakers, the listening position by a few feet, or a piece of furniutre in the room would also make as big a difference.\
Bonsai said:
May be so, may be partly so – and may be not so.
I don't know why different cables sound differently when connected to my audio setup.
The point is that some cables sound better than others – and these are the cables I choose.
john curl said:
Agreed.
Also, for differences between cables to be noted, it takes an audio setup with a certain degree of detail, or resolution. Lower quality audio setups are not detailed enough for such differences to be noted.
Bonsai, let's put some numbers on that. A decent preamp will have a source impedance of (let us say) 500 ohms or less. A power amp on the other end will have an input impedance of (let us say) 10k or more.
Now, looking at various interconnects I have on hand, the resistances are in the 0.4-1.0 ohm range. Yes, one can design a pathological interconnect with 1000 ohms of resistance, but for the sake of argument, let's assume that the cable supplier isn't an idiot. The attenuation of the 1 ohm interconnect is something like -0.0008dB. I think a claim of audibility in this case is extraordinary.
Let's consider the capacitance. Again, looking at the range of cables on hand, they go from 150-500pF. An idiot (or dishonest) "designer" can make something pathological, but again, let's assume honesty and competence. The Thevenin equivalent source is something like 490 ohm, so the resulting HF rolloff is -3dB at 650kHz. Again, a claim of audibility here is extraordinary.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.
Now, looking at various interconnects I have on hand, the resistances are in the 0.4-1.0 ohm range. Yes, one can design a pathological interconnect with 1000 ohms of resistance, but for the sake of argument, let's assume that the cable supplier isn't an idiot. The attenuation of the 1 ohm interconnect is something like -0.0008dB. I think a claim of audibility in this case is extraordinary.
Let's consider the capacitance. Again, looking at the range of cables on hand, they go from 150-500pF. An idiot (or dishonest) "designer" can make something pathological, but again, let's assume honesty and competence. The Thevenin equivalent source is something like 490 ohm, so the resulting HF rolloff is -3dB at 650kHz. Again, a claim of audibility here is extraordinary.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.
Of course cables sound differently because of different parameters, not because of black magic.
Only, I don't know if science and engineering today know of all the impacting parameters that need be measured.
Indeed, hearing the differences between cables takes a high-end audio setup.
Of course, any change to the setup, including moving speakers, changes the sound of the setup. However, when I choose cables, I do it for my existing setup – and I know that the same cable may sound entirely differently on another setup. Not only this – certain cable may sound better connecting my CDP to my pre-amp, while a different cable will sound better connecting my DVD Player to my pre-amp.
However, that cable sound differently isn't a belief of mine – it's a fact, an empirical fact.
SY said:
What's extraordinary to some is ordinary to others.
You assume to know all the factors affecting the way cable sound, when hooked up to a detailed-enough audio setup.
A more open minded stand would be willing to acknowledge empirical phenomena.
On one hand you state that you don't know whether there are people who hear differences between well engineered cables, while on the other hand you try to "prove" that this is impossible scientifically. You argue empirical phenomena with limited scientific and engineering knowledge.
Joshua_G said:
Seems to be a misunderstanding at that point. It´s sometimes a bit difficult for me to argue or explain in a foreign language.
Identification is only an example of a possible answer in each trial.
If i got your routine right, then you are able to assign sort of a certain sonic fingerprint to a specific cable in a repetable manner.
So to me that is something like identification; you only have to ensure that you´ll use every time the same descriptive word. Just for example, if you think one of the cable sounds "less open", then you should every time use this descriptive term. 🙂
If you feel comfortable with the "faked switching" , fine, then there is no need to change in that point.
Bonsai said:
I have compared IC's from the same manufacturer with exactly the same topology but only different quality copper and the difference was very noticeable. In this case I can't believe that it was the equipment that were influenced differently.
When talking about cable differences, I would think that the rest of the setup was done correctly.
André
@ SY,
the amazing point in the never ending cable discussion is, that from an engineering point of view, nearly everything you´ve mentioned was already known right from the beginning (somewhere in the mid 70s).
This fact didn´t prevent a lot of people to think they hear a difference after exchanging cables. And otherwise as syn08 might think, this includes professors, engineers, physicists and so on.
And, strictly spoken, the point that two (reasonable well engineered) cables should not led to different sound perception, is not an engineering argument, but (only) a psychoacoustic one.
Audio reproduction chains are working as holistic systems, so it might be worth to hook up a complete system in its normal working space and then search for differences that may occur after exchanging cables.
Quite often, if you do some measurements, you´ll see a difference; modern computation (maybe to make it simple just use bwaslo´s diffmaker) allows to extract and listen to the difference itself.
So in the end it´s more a question if our knowledge about isolated hearing thresholds is sufficient or not.
the amazing point in the never ending cable discussion is, that from an engineering point of view, nearly everything you´ve mentioned was already known right from the beginning (somewhere in the mid 70s).
This fact didn´t prevent a lot of people to think they hear a difference after exchanging cables. And otherwise as syn08 might think, this includes professors, engineers, physicists and so on.
And, strictly spoken, the point that two (reasonable well engineered) cables should not led to different sound perception, is not an engineering argument, but (only) a psychoacoustic one.
Audio reproduction chains are working as holistic systems, so it might be worth to hook up a complete system in its normal working space and then search for differences that may occur after exchanging cables.
Quite often, if you do some measurements, you´ll see a difference; modern computation (maybe to make it simple just use bwaslo´s diffmaker) allows to extract and listen to the difference itself.
So in the end it´s more a question if our knowledge about isolated hearing thresholds is sufficient or not.
This is what I do. Only, I don't assign description before hand – the description comes after hearing each cable for the first time in a given test. The description given each time (each switch) to certain cable is either the same or very similar – similar in an unmistakable way. For instance, one time I may describe a cable is "less open" and second time "more contracted" – which sonically mean the same thing (to me, at least, in my own vocabulary).
Sorry, what do you mean by "faked switching"?
Exactly – and certain cable will sound differently in different setups.
This why my stand is that no one cable may be declared as "better" generally, because of it's system dependent.
Indeed.
@ Joshua_G,
if you compare switch position 1 to switch position 2, then the term "faked switching" means that your helping friend pretends to switch from 1 to 2 (or 2 to 1), but in fact doesn´t, so that you´re listening two times in a row to the same DUT.
This is called a nil test and is needed in discrimination tests (a discrimination test is a test for same/different).
if you compare switch position 1 to switch position 2, then the term "faked switching" means that your helping friend pretends to switch from 1 to 2 (or 2 to 1), but in fact doesn´t, so that you´re listening two times in a row to the same DUT.
This is called a nil test and is needed in discrimination tests (a discrimination test is a test for same/different).
Joshua_G, you may find that added details will not convince anyone who can't or won't listen for the difference in wires and cable.
I bought a TDR to evaluate the pulse characteristics and characteristic impedance of cables. It didn't help much, however, to understand what is really going on. Dr's Hawksford and Van den Hul seem to know more about wire theory than anyone else.
I bought a TDR to evaluate the pulse characteristics and characteristic impedance of cables. It didn't help much, however, to understand what is really going on. Dr's Hawksford and Van den Hul seem to know more about wire theory than anyone else.
John,
I know I cannot convince anyone and I'm not trying to convince, for it's quite obvious that one who haven't experienced it oneself, will not believe.
All I'm doing is point at the flaws of the pseudo-scientific "proofs" that audible differences in well engineered cables are impossible.
Some people use science as a religion, namely, if it's not proved scientifically, it doesn't exist. They forget that phenomena came first, while science is only coming to understand and formulate the phenomena.
I know I cannot convince anyone and I'm not trying to convince, for it's quite obvious that one who haven't experienced it oneself, will not believe.
All I'm doing is point at the flaws of the pseudo-scientific "proofs" that audible differences in well engineered cables are impossible.
Some people use science as a religion, namely, if it's not proved scientifically, it doesn't exist. They forget that phenomena came first, while science is only coming to understand and formulate the phenomena.
john curl said:
like this 🙂 Merry Christmas to all
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Andre Visser said:
You mean the lead-frame? Quality should be used loosely in this context. I also hope you mean the same device.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.