[
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2008, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]
|
Home
/ FAQ
/ News Classifieds / Events |
Audio Asylum Thread Printer |
Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
65.26.194.23
In Reply to: RE: $550 buys a lot of snake oil these days! (nt) posted by Scrith on February 19, 2008 at 10:04:35
...is that instead of calling a 'buyer beware', the "experts" here encourage the less informed to buy into this stuff. Expert advisors are suppose to look out after the interests of the non-experts. In the two DIY audio forums (outside the asylum) I frequent experts really do give honest advice calling out snake oil for what it is. It's just the opposite here though.
> ...is that instead of calling a 'buyer beware', the "experts" here
> encourage the less informed to buy into this stuff.
This is a site for audiophiles. That is, a site for the somewhat reality-challenged to discuss and develop "flat earth" beliefs about sound, sound perception and the performance of audio hardware along with a bit of support and encouragement from those in the industry.
> Expert advisors are suppose to look out after the interests of the
> non-experts.
Why? Experts are likely to look after the interests of non-expert friends, family and the communities in which they are active members (assuming their advice is wanted). For communities that have sets of values that are opposed to their own are experts going to take an interest?
The audiophile community holds a mishmash of conflicting "flat earth" beliefs and rejects/opposes established knowledge which even extends to simple things taught to school children like Ohms law and the information in a digital signal. There are no "expert" audiophiles if one associates "expert" with mankind's scientific knowledge about sound, sound perception and how audio equipment functions. This is not a problem for audiophiles who have chosen to reject established scientific knowledge in favour of magic and nor is it a problem for experts who take no active interest in the closed audiophile community.
> In the two DIY audio forums (outside the asylum) I frequent experts
> really do give honest advice calling out snake oil for what it is.
> It's just the opposite here though.
So the people putting in the effort to run those sites encourage a different set of values to those running this site. Isn't it good to have a choice? Or are audiophiles and audiophile beliefs a sufficient threat that the mainstream should become concerned?
If people are daft enough to pay absurd sums of money for magic cables then fair enough. I cannot see much wrong with a fool being parted from his money and the people pushing this stuff could be peddling far worse. Is this an unreasonable view?
Excellent post. I especially like the reference to "flat earth" as this is a term I've often used when describing the beliefs of those who see audio through the dogmatic objective lens. I do agree however that choice and a difference of opinion should be respected. The funny thing is, you are 180 degrees out of phase on this one. You hold the prevailing scientific consensus up on a static pedestal when in fact science is fluid and always shifting. Usually these shifts are slow and evolutionary but sometimes they are sudden and constitute a paradigm shift. If you doubt this, or if you do not understand what I am talking about, read a scientific journal from 25, 50, and 100 years past. You'll read some pretty amusing scientific "fact" much of which is wrong from the perspective of today. Do you assume we have reached a point where this dynamic no longer applies? Perhaps you have a unifying law of physics? For those who are not aware, the "laws" of physics as they apply to the universe fall apart when applied to sub atomic particles while the prevailing laws of Quantum mechanics fall apart when describing the universe. Yet despite the fact our fundamental understanding of the universe and it's building blocks are not only incomplete but also contradict one another, both inner and outer space co exist. Perhaps when a unifying law of physics is established our understanding of what actually happens in audio cables will be complete. Audio cables embody both the greater physical universe with their conductors, dielectrics and shielding that we can see, touch and feel, as well as Quantum mechanics as this pertains to the electrons and their EM fields that pass through our cables. It's no wonder strict, if somewhat sophomoric purveyors of the scientific method take such issue with what is obvious to everyone who listens. Don't feel bad, they also ridicule the physicists who are working to establish a unifying law of physics because their work, when complete, will rewrite their reality templates. Flat Earth thinking if you ask me.
The thing I have the hardest time understanding is why people who do not trust their own senses would choose a hobby that is all about subjective enjoyment? I mean if you can't hear the differences in cables or electronics, or if you don't trust your ears when making such comparisons, then what do such people gain from high end audio when mid-fi, with it's perfect measurements, fits their reality construct so nicely, and at a huge savings? Is it status? What do such people base their High End buying decisions on? Spread sheets, graphs, narrowly defined measurements?
Back to the OP's original topic. If he says a USB cable made a significant difference who are we to question what he heard until we first have a chance listen for our selves? Sure polite speculation or discussion is one thing, but the tone and content of many posts here go way beyond what I consider reasonable and polite discourse. At the end of the day high end audio should be about music and what it takes to recreate emotionally moving music at home. For those of us who look at audio in this way it pays to experiment and try new things. Many of us have found cables can and do significantly improve not only the sound of our systems, but also our enjoyment of music. We have also found that power cords have a significant impact on sound despite the fact the signal and current they deliver first traveled through miles of wire of different forms and in different voltages. We accept this because we hear the change they make in our systems. Why would we assume a USB cable should be any different? Is it because deep down inside we do not see the computer as the equal of our stand alone digital transports? Could it be that we don't really believe our computers are in the same league as our old CD players? I'd imagine that when people start to experiment with what goes in front of the DAC, not only will they discover what a USB cable can do, but also that different power supplies in our computers, RAM, isolation platforms, and so on all make a significant contribution. When this starts to become common knowledge PC based audio will finally be maturing and it's full potential will start to be realized. Think about it; what would a traditional state-of-the-art CD player sound like with the same garbage internal components found in our computers (power supplies, capacitors, resistors, connectors, and so on). Now imagine how much better your PC could sound if the same attention to detail was paid to it's internal components as is paid to high end CD players, transports and DAC's. I'd say Synergistic Research's USB cable is a good first step in this direction.
> > I mean if you can't hear the differences in cables or electronics < <
You're generalizing. Electronics can make an audible difference. Cables have less of an impact or no impact at all. Opinions, differ on this.
For most of us with limited resources it makes sense to put your money where it makes the most impact.
Well Jim since you have obviously not heard this cable your opinion is unsubstantiated and the tone of your previous posts places your "opinion," such as it is, in perspective.
You're calling me out because you don't like my opinion? I thought this was an open forum?
Weak
Excellent post. I especially like the reference to "flat earth" as this is a term I've often used when describing the beliefs of those who see audio through the dogmatic objective lens. I do agree however that choice and a difference of opinion should be respected. The funny thing is, you are 180 degrees out of phase on this one. You hold the prevailing scientific consensus up on a static pedestal when in fact science is fluid and always shifting. Usually these shifts are slow and evolutionary but sometimes they are sudden and constitute a paradigm shift. If you doubt this, or if you do not understand what I am talking about, read a scientific journal from 25, 50, and 100 years past. You'll read some pretty amusing scientific "fact" much of which is wrong from the perspective of today. Do you assume we have reached a point where this dynamic no longer applies? Perhaps you have a unifying law of physics? For those who are not aware, the "laws" of physics as they apply to the universe fall apart when applied to sub atomic particles while the prevailing laws of Quantum mechanics fall apart when describing the universe. Yet despite the fact our fundamental understanding of the universe and it's building blocks are not only incomplete but also contradict one another, both inner and outer space co exist. Perhaps when a unifying law of physics is established our understanding of what actually happens in audio cables will be complete. Audio cables embody both the greater physical universe with their conductors, dielectrics and shielding that we can see, touch and feel, as well as Quantum mechanics as this pertains to the electrons and their EM fields that pass through our cables. It's no wonder strict, if somewhat sophomoric purveyors of the scientific method take such issue with what is obvious to everyone who listens. Don't feel bad, they also ridicule the physicists who are working to establish a unifying law of physics because their work, when complete, will rewrite their reality templates. Flat Earth thinking if you ask me.
The thing I have the hardest time understanding is why people who do not trust their own senses would choose a hobby that is all about subjective enjoyment? I mean if you can't hear the differences in cables or electronics, or if you don't trust your ears when making such comparisons, then what do such people gain from high end audio when mid-fi, with it's perfect measurements, fits their reality construct so nicely, and at a huge savings? Is it status? What do such people base their High End buying decisions on? Spread sheets, graphs, narrowly defined measurements?
Back to the OP's original topic. If he says a USB cable made a significant difference who are we to question what he heard until we first have a chance listen for our selves? Sure polite speculation or discussion is one thing, but the tone and content of many posts here go way beyond what I consider reasonable and polite discourse. At the end of the day high end audio should be about music and what it takes to recreate emotionally moving music at home. For those of us who look at audio in this way it pays to experiment and try new things. Many of us have found cables can and do significantly improve not only the sound of our systems, but also our enjoyment of music. We have also found that power cords have a significant impact on sound despite the fact the signal and current they deliver first traveled through miles of wire of different forms and in different voltages. We accept this because we hear the change they make in our systems. Why would we assume a USB cable should be any different? Is it because deep down inside we do not see the computer as the equal of our stand alone digital transports? Could it be that we don't really believe our computers are in the same league as our old CD players? I'd imagine that when people start to experiment with what goes in front of the DAC, not only will they discover what a USB cable can do, but also that different power supplies in our computers, RAM, isolation platforms, and so on all make a significant contribution. When this starts to become common knowledge PC based audio will finally be maturing and it's full potential will start to be realized. Think about it; what would a traditional state-of-the-art CD player sound like with the same garbage internal components found in our computers (power supplies, capacitors, resistors, connectors, and so on). Now imagine how much better your PC could sound if the same attention to detail was paid to it's internal components as is paid to high end CD players, transports and DAC's. I'd say Synergistic Research's USB cable is a good first step in this direction.
That is not science or innovation or a great step in the right direction...that is exploitation of the naive.
....you're right!! The guys at Synergistic tied Steve down over a fire ant hill, and FORCED him to enjoy, then purchase the USB cable.
Oh, the horror of being so naive. THAT will teach Steve!
Of course, you already know better, don't 'ya.
Erm...I said exploit, not coerce. And I am certain that Steve (is that Mercman?) enjoys that cable of his own free will, and that it is anything but horrific to him. But I also certain that whoever charged him $550 is laughing all the way to the bank.
Does your observation on the merits of a USB cable and it's cost hold true for all cables in the Audio play back chain? Curious.
No, and I've got another post around here somewhere that details the many expensive ANALOG cables I own and use.
Scrith,
I understand you skepticism-in fact I share it. The thing is all high end cables when first introduced were met with similar disbelief. When Gold Endz and Foulton Gold interconnects came out in the 1970's most people threw rocks at them because it was a new idea and the reasons why interconnects could make a difference were not fully understood (this is still the case for some it seems). While all that was necessary for perfect sound from any loud speaker was a 16 gauge lamp cord (again this is still true for some). And what about power cords? How were they first received?
The point is PC Audio is new and some are making the same assumptions regarding what can and cannot be improved upon with PC Audio as was made for hi-fi in the 70's, 80's and 90's. But for anyone who has invested in cables because they can hear and appreciate the differences cables make don't assume a USB cable should be any different. I'd imagine it won't stop here. I am certain that different brands of RAM, internal power supplies, hard drives or static memory and so on, will all combine to elevate the state-of-the-art for computer Audio. A little skepticism is healthy but when it precludes you from trying new things with nothing to loose it becomes very unhealthy.
Excellent post. I would love to try the SR cable (there are 4 or 5 other SR cables in my system and I think they are quite good) but can't say I will.
Cheers
> > "flat earth" beliefs about sound, sound perception and the performance of audio hardware along with a bit of support and encouragement from those in the industry < < <
Are you saying that there may be industry shills here? "Experts" whose job it is to advocate snake oils? $550 cables, $10K DACs, Shakti Stones, etc..
Oh my gosh, I would have never believed it!...heh...heh
"Don't you jive me with that cosmic debris..." FZ
If I can add my 2 cents here.
It is true that different digital cables do sound different that is my perosnal experience with cabels such as Wydeye, form Apogee electronics, also RCA SPDIF cables Canare cabels with Canare 75 ohm connectors, illuminatti D-60, a cut of RG-59 terminated with some pretty good quality crimp on RCA connectors, other Kimber, MIT, Monster, some DIY (NIgel Pond Special), and a few others.
when heard and compared the same digital source (Pioneer Elite DVD player, Samsung Blu Ray BDP1200,CAL dedicated delta CD drive, Krell KAV300CD and also a PC based CD/DVD rom Drive.
They all invariably imparted their own sound soem better than others and by better I mean more clear, more coherent, beter bass, more extended, more delineated, better mids, more cristal clear top end etc.
Also the cbaels have their own sonic signature though less prominent than a good or bad analog cable interconnect as a refference, but still imparting its own sound.
Even to a DAC such as the Benchmark media still can tell small differneces in sound even though the DAC1 reclock and upconverts everything to 24 bits 192KHz. if you can't hear that simply your capability to hear things is impaired or simply your system lack enough resolution to hear the minute changes that might impart more musicality or plain old enjoyability of it.
So far my best DAC is the tube CAL ALpha with soem pair of TungsRam ECC83 tubes vintage 1960's.
I'm still to hear a 1543 DAC a good buddy of mine (Wheezer) had cooked up for me with Doede's special board (imported form Germany) and some upgraded components.
I don't think you spending $500 on a USB cable is what sanity calls for, but I do believe different cables sound different and soem of them in the right conext with the right components and in the right room can sound suberb!! thsi is clearley the case of Magnan cables (Analog and speakers too that uses brass??? of all materials to impart its own special signature to much success . . . people swear by mollecualr arrangement of the cristal by cryo treatment, there sui al kinds of stuff that really works, unfortunately this is an industry in which we laureate some of te self dilussional people that charge you for a "Teleportation tweak" that they perfrm their magic over the telephone and with their flobby dust everything sounds better, well gess what I am not surprised those people don't claim that you need the trick doen once a year becaus eof environmental causes it wears away the effect kinda thing . .. that's one end of the spectrum. On the other end you have the engineers that swear that if you can't scope it or measure it or quantify it, it just can't hear it . . .
I learned to know that sometimes we try to hard to measure or quantify with the wrong tools, that sometimes your ear is more sensitive than a meter or scope, and that most of the times we try to measure and understand beyond our capacity.
All I can tell you is that USB cables should be subject to the same set of variables that other digital cables are so hearing differences is a personal thing, maybe the $550 USb cable is betteer in some regard to the $1.25 USb I bought in cablestogo, however is how you feel about what you do that gives or takes away form your enjoyment of this hobby.
If you feel empowered by spending half of a thousand bucks, to hear things clearer or better then do it if it pleases you, makes you happy and will not take away form your family responsibilities financially.
Now, if you feel like an IDIOT because you had to starve your kids for 2 weeks to get the money to satisfy your audio latest and greates ambition , media crazed fed addiction, then by all means please don't!
Also be aware that the law of diminishing return apply here in spades.
that the differnece between a cable for $1.25 to a $550 cabel is not even a considerable factor as percentages, will you get a 20 % (or even less)cable for 440 times the price.
Now, that's what I call Insane . . .
The rest is up to you.
I am a cable believer I own interconnects form Kimber Kable (most of ém silver) then soem really super expensive cables from Australian manufacturer PSC, some from Shunyata, Monster, XLO, and a few others, they all very good ecpecially the Kimbers and the PSC's, but they all do have a particular synergy with a aprticular components in its own context, they do different things to different components.
The real secret is to find the components that synergize betwen them even though you connect them with not so $$$uperior cable$. and to me that is the secret of trial and error.
The higher up you go un the price latter, the less you have to figit around looking for synergy.
But as music and audio is concern there is such a thing as audio heaven for the common man, just takes some time and effort to matching the components, upgrade some resistors and capacitors in soem components pays VERY BIG dividends, room placements, a few tweaks, experiemnt with cables, audio points, mass loading source components (it works guys!!)
You can feel free to critizise my lines or agree or disagree with me, we still live in a free country. Thank God for that!
Hope this helps a little bit
God Bless!
Gonzalo
See the Wikipedia article.
v
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2008, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]