|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
I know that the simple fact that this forum exists my question will either be taken as foolish or heresy, but here goes: for someone with an entry level system (NAD 521i CD to NAD 7175pe receiver to Mission M71 speakers), is there REALLY an audible difference between decent 16 gauge copper wire and expensive, brand name cables? Now I'm not talking about the subtle "i just spent $300 on cables, don't they sound great" placebo effect that I think many audiophiles experience. I mean real, blind, side-by-side tests that indicate a difference that most listeners can discern. This isn't an idle speculation: I'm trying to decide if I should spend my hard earned $ on cables, or get a big fat spool of 16 gauge.Thanks
(on a side note -- I read somewhere that it was thought replacing the external pre-amp to power amp jumpers (as on my 7175) with high end cable might boost sound quality; I welcome comments on that idea as well)
Follow Ups:
primoff,
as you can see, many different views/explanations/opinions/situations/beliefs, etc, etc. be careful what you believe. the reason why this hobby exists is because there are infinite variables. your equipment and wires will break-in over time, equipment matches, room accoustics, recordings, your ears, and on and on. i am just starting to become interested in this stuff and like you had this very question. but i keep making the mistake of forming a belief and then finding out i was wrong. it's a blast. i can now listen to any system and immediately know what i like and dont like and why. i've listened to $30,000 systems and impressive as they are, i can find just as much enjoyment from systems similar to yours. for instance, small bookshelves can have pinpoint imaging and be very intimate. bigger systems can give fuller feeling experiences. to some point, there are trade-offs. i've heard the missions m71's extensively. every time i listen to them (on solid stands), i am blown away. amazing bass, soundstage, wonderful high mid. what you get for a couple hundred bucks is simply phenomenal value. nad also, seems to build products with very good value. do some research and try a cable that is considered to be a very good value, not expensive. give it time to break in. not considering cable, imo, can be a waste of potential in your system. with a little effort, i think you will find a cable that will have an effect like the missions do. finding the right cable/wires may bring your entire system to a higher level, beyond what you ever would have thought. for starting out, wires are usually the shittiest part of an entry level hi-fi system and will probably give you the best bang for your buck (after a solid speaker stand and optimum placement). i do not believe you will be able to tell wire differences in a showroom. if the salesman doesnt get this, go somewhere else. try to use demo cables or used becuase they will sound best. you dont need a dbt test. just listen. you will know a difference by listening to a favourite album. during the album you will be either be thinking, "wow, this band is amazing" or "hmm, i think i might be getting tired of this band". make notes. if you dont hear any differences dont worry or make judgements to quickly and strongly. ie. maybe your cd player is lacking, or maybe the recording, or maybe not. again there are many variables. hopefully, this will become fun. or maybe it may feel like a chore.
but if you get the right match, it will easily be worth your time. when i tried different cables, i was shocked. my system is roughly $7000.cdn retail and with good wires i feel like my system is an absolute steal. i sit stunned for hours in amazement and wonder how it could be more enjoyable. with shitty wire, i literally get a headache, want to replace and upgrade everything, feel like i got totally ripped off and feel like an idiot for spending so much to get so little enjoyment. sorry this is so long, but i had to say it. dont believe for a second, wire does not matter. it is like saying a $200 speaker sounds the same as a $20 speaker. and not all $200 speakers sound the same, either. wire is the same way. just be careful with certain wires and not to judge all wires to have the same value. if i listen to a $200 dollar brand x floorstander, i might think it sounds like, well a $200 speaker, but with brand y $200 speaker, i might be holy crap, that sounds amazing and for $200 bucks is a steal. no diff for wires.
your sysytem will never reach its full sonic potential with poor cables...cables matter a lot...if you want them to :)
I started out as a skeptic. I now have over $2000 worth of wires and cables. If you can hear it, AND you can afford it,... BUY IT! That goes for equipment as well. Most cable companies will give you from 30 to 45 days to audition their stuff. The real question is, which ones are actually better at a given price point, because different isn't necessarily better. Sonny
Or let me put it to you another way.If you had a system in which you owned a pair of Magnepan MG 20.1s, a pair of Audio Physic Minos subwoofers, a pair of VTL Siegfried monoblock amplifiers, a VTL TL-7.5 line stage preamp, and a Linn CD-12 CD player (system price = $95,500, tax not included), would you use $20 interconnects and 16-gauge zip cord?
I wouldn't.
Would cables make a difference in this rig?
You bet!
In this example, I would be willing to spend up to $20,000 for cables if I could afford it.
Once I had an experience where 400$ wires sounded more to my liking than 25,000$ wire. ( only difference was I used different preamp in the same system )Did the very same 400$ cable work in different systems?
nope.
They sounded absolutely horrid to my ears in other systems.You really can't determine the value of wire or a degree of performance they bring to a system by the price tag.
Your seemingly innocent question has really sparked a flurry of responses.To answer your question, yes good cables do make a difference over cables that are "bundled" with some electronics. These "free" cables are very cheaply made, and while they do pass a signal (at least most of the time), they do not compare to after-market cables of even modest cost. And as one's system becomes more refined, musical, and able to resolve the smallest of details, cables play an increasingly more important role, especially when delineating ambient cues, spatial relationships among instruments, and the delicate overtones and harmonics that comprise the life and soul of music.
The intrinsic worth of cable upgrades depends, in large measure, upon the listener, his or her tastes in music and audio equipment, how demanding the listener is, and how much he or she is willing to spend on wire. The only guidelines I can give you are those espoused by Robert Harley, the chief editor of TAS: spend up to 10% to 15% of your system price on cables. If your system costs $5,000, he would recommend spending between $500 and $750. For some, this rule of thumb would be too arbitrary and restrictive; for others, Robert's advice might be too extravagant. It is, after all, a personal matter.
My own experience tells me that cables do, in deed, make a difference. "Stock" cables are the equivalent of sonic dross. However, it's also been my experience that the differences among good cables are small and subtle. Whereas others might claim huge differences, and for others still, cables become a religion of sorts.
The best advice I can give you is to take the opinions here seriously. You have received many good posts. Look at some moderately priced upgrade cables and listen to them at your dealer's showroom. Compare them against the really cheap stuff that is given away with budget gear. If you can't tell a difference, then maybe you should feel lucky that you don't need to spend your audio dollars on cables, and maybe instead you can buy more music. Over time, however, your hearing acuity and appreciation may improve and you may begin perceiving tones and sounds that you could not detect before. That certainly was true for me. Also as you buy more expensive components for your system, you may begin to see your cables as the limiting factor to higher fidelity. There will come a time, however, when you will reach the point of diminishing returns. This point is different for each of us. Only you will know when you have passed it.
nt
Harley's guidelines are bunk and lack sensibility. It assumes, amongst many other things, that the cost/benefit ratio for different components is linear. This obviously is illogical and improbable.
are just that, a rough guideline to give a ball park idea.Are such "rule of thumb" recommendations cast in stone? Of course not, and spending a sensible amount on any system component should be the goal for everyone not aflicted with unending cash.
I think the point is, cables are a component, just like the other components in a system, and should be considered just as carefully.
I agree. IME cables affect sound quality. Relative to other components, it's a small difference IMO, but that's another issue entirely. All I meant to express was that attaching a suggested percentage of overall system cost to any component, cables included, is completely nonsensical. If Harley wanted to say that cables should be regarded as components that affect sound, then he should've just said cables should be regarded as components that affect sound.
It's nonsensical for the enduser, but it is must have guide for cable makers by which they can build and price their product lines to be in accordance with the electronics industry.
I guess you don't like Robert's guidelines. Like I said, some treat cables as if it were some sort of religion.Tell me how do you feel about his self-righteous editorial in the most recent issue of TAS regarding his views toward audio dealers and how we should treat them?
It's not that I dislike Harley (not to say I particularly like him either :-P). It's just his guideline - one which is often referenced - makes no sense.I haven't read recent TAS issues. I've lost interest in the publication a long time ago.
Before you go messing with different cables you should probably learn how to properly aim your speakers. Find the soundstage.Oh and try some Kimber 4TC. It made my EE brother a believer. He heard details in his favorite music he never heard before.
As for those preamp to amp jumpers, dont worry about that just yet. Any change they would make would be much harder to hear versus a full set of speaker cables. I think you actually have a decent system. Cables will make slight improvements but they won't make it sound like you spent thousands on it. I think cables are just part of the hobby. Since I put together a really quality system I don't worry about the cables as much. And I prefer to build my own anyway.
If you really want to improve your sound the speakers and electronics should come first. I still have my old NAD integrated amp, but it's in my bedroom system and soon to be replaced by vacuum tubes. Probably the best education I got was simply finding a high end audio shop and listening to everything they had for a couple years and then deciding on what I wanted. Cables were never a priority, they were just the icing on the cake.
Rob CThe world was made for people not cursed with self-awareness
You don't have to spend a fortune on Big Brand(tm). The situation you describe is correct in my mind. When you jump from a cheap zip cord, that is stranded not-so-good copper covered with PVC, to a $300 Big Brand cable (better copper, better plastic but still plastic) the difference is for many too subtle to be heard, and the investment becomes unjustifiable performance-wise (it could be justified from an easthetic standpoint though). A bigger leap would surely get everyone's attention. But is it necessary to spend $4K on a Big Brand? No.
It is recognized by all including Big Brand that the perfect wire for audio applications has the thinest insulation (air being the ultimate) and is made of the purest copper or/and silver, with a gauge that optimizes the balance between skin effect losses and resistance losses. Get your hands on those and everyone will hear a difference. These kind of cables are relatively easy to buy or make under $100. A search in this forum will give you many ideas. I would get that as a reference, and then try Big Brand(tm) models against it to hear what you miss or gain.
I would not be surprised if you find cables costing $500 sound worse than a pair of twisted enamel-covered 18-gauge, solid-core copper, provided that you don't need over a 15 ft length.
.
all healthy, clear arteries and veins work perfectly well: I'm not asking if light-weight zip wire sounds the same as $500 boutique cables (or clogged schlerotic arteries vs. clear, healthy ones)...I'm asking if there's a real, audible difference between good, high gauge wire (ie Monster 16 gauge) and really expensive cables.
HowdyAnd you've gotten answers. They can make a huge difference, BUT whether that difference matters to you or not we can't answer. Personally I thought the Monster 16 gauge sucked and almost any AudioQuest cable beat it in my system. (As did magnet wire, for my Cain & Cain Abby speakers.) FWIW, I always do blind and sometimes double blind tests in my own system before deciding to purchase a component, cable or tweak, but I doubt that these tests matter to anyone else who wasn't there, nor do I think they should.
-Ted
P.S. Just in case you haven't read the rules, discussion of DBT tests, etc. aren't allowed on this particular forum and if you'd like to get an answer to your question at that level, head over to Prop Heads or other fora.
Perform an experiment of 5 different designs and use several different connector types and manfs. and see what you hear.
Try out some cables for yourself. The fun in this hobby is trying out different things to see what works and what doesn't. I recommend trying some speaker cables first. Go to a dealer who will loan you some. In my case, since I don't live near a high end audio store, I've used The Cable Company (1-800-fatwyre or www.fatwyre.com) and found them to be very helpful. They will send you up to 3 loaner cables at a time for you to evaluate. You will only need to commit to 10% of the price of the most expensive cable you borrow, which will be applied to any eventual purchase. It's been a couple of years since I've used The Cable Company so some of this may have changed, but I definitely consider them reliable. Go ahead and give it a try and let us know what you discover.
Quite frankly, you're on the wrong forum to be asking that question. It is the majority position that they do here.....And they do, I got absolutely no sound without them.....
On a serious note, no one has ever demonstrated that like cables sound different in a controlled test. (speaker, interconnect, and AC power cords)
So I would say, save your money, buy the generic stuff and put your money into more music.
My posistion is in the minority here. If you want this viewpoint not in the minority, you'll have to seek out a different forum.
Thanks for the straight-up response. I knew before I posted that I was just asking to be strung up by cable zeolots, but I really think the crux of my question is valid, even among the believers: simply put: has anyone ever done a BLIND side-by-side test to determine whether or not there's a truly audible difference. I know most of the people on this site believe there is, or they wouldn't be here; and there is plenty of personal, anecdotal evidence (i changed the cable and it changed my life, etc.). But I was hoping for some fairly objective replies about the reality of cabledom and the apparent lack of real empirical evidence of audible improvement. I've been, for the most part, dissapointed by such replies as "with gear as low-end as yours, don't bother," but yours is appreciated (as are the simple "try for yourself" replies, though even those don't really answer my primary question of and honest, objective examination of the value of high end cables. Thanks to all for the replies...I might try some better cables, might not, but appreciate those who took the time to reply.
Well, we aren't really supposed to get into DBT's on this part of the board. Probably should go to the Prop-head section as it is off limits here.One of the inexpensive experimental routes would be to roll your own.
You won't find objective replies in human sensory quantification. I can say, however, that I've done DBT evaluations with cables (wrapped in opaque flexlume and administered by a friend) and was able to consistently pick the same cable which I preferred over others. But this is still subjective. FWIW, it's not always the most expensive designs I prefer, and I concur the sonic differences are subtle in comparision to, say, speaker designs. But IMO, they're clearly audible even if I can't explain why.
Absolutely...human sensory responses are, by dint of our impressively malleable brains, subjective...that's why DBT's are used ...to minimize (exclude) that subjectivity from any test's end results...your reply is appreciated and, not only one of the most reasonable, but also one of the few that have actually spoken to the question I posed. Thanks again.
A simple and quick answer to your question of "Do cables REALLY matter?" is yes they do. The last 12 months or so I have been seriously playing around with and experimenting with audio cables (power, analog interconnect, digital interconnect and speaker cables). In my experience I do believe that the more resolving/higher resolution systems are generally more sensitive to the different cables used.I do also believe that a system like the one you mentioned would be improved by upgrading the cables within the system. Based on the investment of the system you mentioned, I suspect that you have a price to performance concern. Which is very understandable. Based on your post, it sounds like you are thinking of replacing the speaker cables. I suppose a reasonable question would be, "How much would you want or are willing to spend for how much performance increase?".
Possibly replacing a different cable in your system would yield a better performance per dollar ratio. How exactly is your system setup and what cables do you currently have in your system? You mentioned, "pre-amp to power amp jumpers". Is the NAD 7175pe a receiver? If it is a receiver, isn't the amplification built in or are you running a seperate amplifier? Where does the pre-amp to power amp jumpers go? I am not familiar with NAD equipment.
If you give us more info, possibly the AA inmates may be able to give you a few suggestions.
cdc
The NAD has external solid core jumpers from the pre-out to power-in jacks on the rear panel (i assume this is so that you could either run an outboard preamp into the receiver's power section, or the pre-amp out to an outboard power amp). I have read that changing these could show a marked improvement at minimal cost...any idea how one might go about doing this? As for the cost factor, I'm most interested in cost/benefit ratio...I simply don't want to spend a lot for only a marginal improvement...a roll of Monster 16 gauge can do that. The larger question is, will boutique cables give me a benefit on par with their cost differential over the simple 16 gauge? Or should I not really bother with it.
If the setup for the jumpers in your NAD are like the Yamaha Receiver I had awhile back, they utilize RCA connections. The Yamaha receiver I had was setup the way you described. Replacing these jumpers should improve the NAD sonically. I would contact and check with NAD and see if they have any recommendations regarding the replacement of these jumpers. If the jumpers are RCA connections (the Yamaha had a total of two pairs) you can make two short pairs of high quality jumpers."If" they are RCA jumpers, you can just try a set of inexpensive 3' RCA cables and use them in lieu of the jumpers and see if that makes a difference. If you find that this makes a difference, a pair of short silver jumpers should really make a difference.
Regarding speaker cables, boutique cables as you call them will sound better in most setups then 16 ga. Monster brand wire. The better the cable, the better the results. Please note, I did not say the more expensive the cable, but the better the cable, the better the results.
I was like yourself, before I was exposed and experimented with higher end audio cables thought that someone had to be freaking nuts to spend $300+ on any audio cable. Since perception of value (or "cost differential" as you say) is individualistic, it is near impossible to give you a specific recommendation. What you can do is go on Ebay and purchase a speaker cable like the Zu Cable Wax or Julien. I think they run about $80-$150 for a 10' pair through an Ebay auction and try them out. If you do not like them you have 60 days to return them. Free to find out for yourself, you have nothing to lose.
Good Luck!
thanks.
nt
Just a little reading.http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/audio/skineffect/page1.html
Very interesting. thanks. while my read-through was rather quick, itseems clear that, at least according to this author, the real-world performance difference between most decent cables ought to be inaudible in most settings...the general theme seems to be that you should use the heaviest gauge copper as is practical (stranded or solid), and that, beyond this, most differences are likely to be minimal.
I did a sound check between an illuminati, a monster digital ic and a soundprofessional glass toslink. And they all had different sounds.
Primoff,Not quite the quality of the conductor makes a huge difference plus other factors. Synergistic research uses only coper for there speaker cables. If you remember the freq response curve of silver and copper they are identical. If you go with off the shelf wire go with 99.99% pure copper.
Read this post , which references a system that has less resolution than the one you've listed. The commercial cables used are inexpensive, particularly the bulk speaker cable, and no double blind testing should be required to identify the obvious improvements in fidelity that they provide over zip cord.
_____________________________"But this is the plastic age,
the quiet rage
is damned and civilized."
Talk about a hotly debated subject. As for me I don't use the crap they give you when you buy gear but well made entry level cables. I like the way they look and their constuction more than warrants the extra cost for me. Depending on who you talk to you have guys saying no under any circumstances, yes but only on a Hi-Res system whatever that means and just plain yes.I have never done cable swaps looking to see if I could hear a change but conversely I have never stumbled into a difference I could say was due to a cable change either.
zip experience, based on these posts), yet, I quote you as follows:"Now I'm not talking about the subtle "i just spent $300 on cables, don't they sound great" placebo effect that I think many audiophiles experience."
Perhaps try the following website (just click on the link provided)?
...and never equate performance with price tag amongst designer cables.
When it comes to wire, they react differently in different systems.
personal thing. Also, which cables are better, or best, again, despite what the gurus will have you believe, is a personal preference type of thing. You probably would not let someone else tell you which woman to marry, so why let them tell you which cables are best for you?The answer to your question is, try some and see what YOU LIKE! There is no substitute for direct, personal experience...
Great response for " which woman to marry ".Now, how 'bout cables???? :> )
The least expensive cables I know of that are well-made and have a return policy with great support from Frank are Signal Cables. I've used them with some success (meaning I was able to discern positive sound differences). However, if you really want to buy a spool of Radio Shack speaker wire, at least buy 12AWG.
I'd suggest that you consider springing for a pair of high-quality preamp-amp jumpers first. If you hear a difference, you may want to think about upgrading the rest of your cables. If you don't, put off dealing the whole cable thing until after you've upgraded your components.
I read elsewhere about the value of upgrading the jumpers. How does one do that? are there high-end jumpers on the market? does one fabricate them?
Hmmm, a lot harder to find on Google than I thought it would be. Maybe a nice simple DIY project?
I phoned a local NAD dealer and, after he commented on the vintage of my receiver, told me that yes, indeed, replacing the jumpers would result in a substantial improvement...and recommended simply using high quality 1 meter RCA cables...so that's what I'm going to try. Certainly easy enought to check out.
.5 meter ICs will cost less, and you'll have less cable in the signal path.
_____________________________"But this is the plastic age,
the quiet rage
is damned and civilized."
Yes cables can really make a big difference. I myself had a jaw dropping cable epiphany just yesterday after getting some new interconnects.When I was starting out I had some Mission speakers and MIT Terminator 4 cables worked well with them. When you get some better equipment chances are better cables will bring more noticable differences. And more expensive is not necessarily better.
primoff, Like Corndog, most of us here seem to have been sceptics in the past, then we HEARD the difference. I agree with what I think was Norm's underlying point, you'd be better off moving up in electronics with your next audio dollars. In general, cables make a lesser difference then does a change in speaker, amp, or pre. Tony points out that an excellent cable can transmit more faithfully than can a poor cable, regardless of the sound source, and I agree, but with your current system, you might not want to hear more faithfully....Enjoy the music!
I as well as many friends of mine who aren't into this hobby have heard cable differences. They even heard them on low budget stereos cheaper than what you described. Heck, the first time I saw the prices of some of these cables I was sceptical too. I eventually took a chance with an open mind. I bought a $70 pair of interconnects and plugged them into my car stereo and IMMEDIATELY heard a difference over the cheap freebie cables the car audio joint used to install my amp. Nobody can tell you what you hear. If you hear no differences then you can rest easy knowing that you have no need for more expensive cables. Some cable companies even offer a money back guarantee if you're not satisfied.
Rob CThe world was made for people not cursed with self-awareness
But this is not to say they don't matter with better equipment.
The theory "better systems require better cables" is really a flawed concept and very misleading. Job of cable is to transfer a signal from point A to point B with minimum loss, and cable doesn't depend on the equipment to do its job "better". It will depend on its own specifications. So if you want a cable to do its job right whether equipment cost $100 or $10,000, then get a good quality cables regardless of system cost :)
I said that with his low priced system he would be unlikely to hear differences.
Are you the Tony Montana who used to be Great White's bassist?Inquiring Minds Want To Know,
-Lummy The Seahorse
My first name is Tony, and I'm big fan of Al Pacino-especially in that movie with all the drugs being snorted
.
Scarface was a GREAT movie with top of the world acting from all the cast, but Al was always the Master:-)
I think you are misunderstanding his comment. Nowhere did he say "better systems require better cables". What I believe he meant is that better equipment will more likely let you hear the positive benefits of better cables.
....as "better systems require better cables"-except may be couple of words twisted a bitIf we go by the assumption that best cables are the ones that are most transparent (minimum loss of signal), then it will become more apparent why that theory is flawed.
Once a cable is designed to be most transparent (as according to its application, usage and specifications), then there are no "better" cables...unless one get away from "transparent" concept and shift gear in other direction (intentionally alter cable's capacitance or inductance to make it sound different) which make a cable less transparent :)
a
...since that is not their department :)
a
I don't recall that you've ever volunteered that information. The systems you've tried those cables on would be useful, also. Thanks.
_____________________________"But this is the plastic age,
the quiet rage
is damned and civilized."
then how come all cables sound different?
by themselves : )It is the electrical characteristics of each component interphase combined with the characteristics ( impedances, levels of reactance, materials used, dielectric absorption, etc... ) of the cable itself that causes variations in sonic perceptions. Change one variable in the equation ( active component or cable ) and you've change the electrical characteristics ( and sonics ) of the circuit.
As such, make the circuit as linear as possible over the widest bandwidth with the least amount of self-loss introduced and you're there. It doesn't matter what it costs or how it is achieved, linearity is linearity is linearity. I think that this is what Tony was getting at, but didn't quite say. Sean
>
*As such, make the circuit as linear as possible over the widest bandwidth with the least amount of self-loss introduced and you're there.*This sounds really good on paper. :-)
As Ted eluded, in a real life, I am not so sure if such wires even they are of matched the right specs and matched electrically to the rest of the system, how they work together is anybody's guess. ( of course, certain common sense applies here as far as impedance matching and cable length and so forth )
But I tell ya... when it comes to wire, I've stopped 'thinking bout it' and I just try and see.
but proper design can minimize the damages that the cables themselves cause within the circuit.As such, a good cable becomes electrically benign yet acts as a link that allows the active circuitry to react according to what the signal dictates. If the cable does anything more than act as a "benign link", it is adding colouration to the signal. In some cases, these colourations can be performed in such a manner so at to actually improve or restore linearity that was "defiled" elsewhere in the system. This could be done via flawed yet very specific impedance transformation characteristics. Since all component interphases are individually different, this type of signal manipulation would need to be performed on a component to component basis. That is why i mentioned there not being any type of "universal interconnect".
Having said all of that, i sincerely doubt that more than 2% of all audiophiles have ever even thought about doing something like this, let alone attempted it. Hell, most manufacturers don't even consider doing something like this and they are the ones designing the flawed gear to begin with!!! Sean
>
HowdyIndeed I could almost believe that if we all had ideal components that an ideal cable would be, well, ideal. But we don't and answering the question 'Do cables matter?' with the statement that 'in an ideal system, sufficiently good cables don't matter' isn't useful. You can prove anything with a false premise.
I never said that cables don't matter, regardless of how superior or inferior the rest of the system was.What i did say is that altering the feedpoint, terminating and nominal impedances of adjoining components alters electrical and sonic characteristics. While one can achieve similar impedances between multiple different cables by using some type of impedance matching networks at one or both ends, that is not the same electrically or sonically as maintaining the same nominal impedances along the entire length of the cable.
Having said that, until we can come up with some specific industry standards for input and output impedances with specific levels of capacitve, inductive and resistive reactance, there will never be a universal interconnect. As such, variances will come into play with different mating components and cables being used. How noticeable or how big of a variation one encounters can range anywhere from quite subtle to quite drastic.
With that in mind and unlike interconnects, the design criteria for the "perfect" speaker cable design has already been established and is well known. Too bad some folks have such a hard time figuring this part of the equation out. Using speaker cables designed for maximum linearity and power transfer over a wide bandwidth and then choosing interconnects on a component to component interphase level makes things so much more effective and easy. That is, if one is trying to achieve both good sonic results and technical accuracy i.e. "accurate musicality". By doing this, you remove just one more colouration from the system, increasing both resolution and transparancy. If you don't do this, you have yet one more variable and colouration to contend with when trying to dial in a system. Sean
>
HowdyYou said "... I think that this is what Tony was getting at,..." I was reacting to his typical posts and pointing out that his posts aren't terribly useful for the reasons that I stated.
The key words in his post were "accurate musicality" and "less coloration from the system". And that should be the objective.I think the question that raises alot of dust is how do we achieve those objectives?...and the answer would be to get a transparent cable that do not alter the sound of system for better or worse.....which mean the best cables are "soundless" :)
*The key words in his post were "accurate musicality" and "less coloration from the system". And that should be the objective.*Perhaps, that's your objective.
Persoanly, I don't really give a damn if they are colored or alter a signal so long as I get the the end results I want.What you think as an 'Accurate musicality' ( whatever this means ) might differ from mine.
Yours truely,
Elvira Hancock
:-D
1) What are the end results that you seek?2) How do you justify or quantify whether or not you've met the majority of those goals?
3) If you have no specific method to justify or quantify the standards and goals that you've set for your system, how do you know what is lacking, what to change or when you've fully reached those goals?
These are not meant to be "trick questions" so much as they are to help me better understand where you are coming from and how you go about things. Sean
>
*1) What are the end results that you seek?*to have a good groove. :-)
*2) How do you justify or quantify whether or not you've met the majority of those goals?*
if i like it, and if i can afford it, i get it.
*3) If you have no specific method to justify or quantify the standards and goals that you've set for your system, how do you know what is lacking, what to change or when you've fully reached those goals? *
I know it when I hear it.
Not everyones' metholodogy agrees with yours, obviously. :-)
at least i can keep track of where i've been and where i'm going. Wandering aimlessly about can be a helluva lot of fun and very "educational" and entertaining, but it is typically not a way to make a lot of progress in a short period of time : )I'm not going to criticize your methods or your goals. After all, the bottom line should be about music and enjoying it. If you can't do that, no matter how you've built the system, it's no good. If you can enjoy your music on your system, that is all that counts. Having said that though, it is the very fact that music reproduction and system building is so subjective that makes it harder for us to communicate. There are no set standards, so there is little progress.
The fact that someone can take what is a truly terrific product and mate it with something that is a truly horrific product and then blame the wrong product is typically the result of lack of organization and understanding. By minimizing those variables, we can only hope to improve performance on the whole for everyone. That is, for those that are seeking "musical accuracy" on the whole and not just their own version of "musical bliss via personally prefered colourations".
This is NOT a poke at you or anyone else, but an observation about the very different types of audiophiles that frequent these and other forums like it. I am by nature a "techno-geek" because i not only want things to work "right", but i want to know how / why they work and if they aren't, what it takes to make them perform as expected. Obviously, others are more than content to just flip a switch or two and enjoy the presentation, regardless of how or why it is the way it is. Sean
>
*Wandering aimlessly about can be a helluva lot of fun and very "educational" and entertaining, but it is typically not a way to make a lot of progress in a short period of time : )*yeah.. well.. i'm not in a hurry.
but, pretty much I know where i'm going tho. Agreed on experimenting for sake of experimenting isn't my thing particularly for cables.
Exploring 'what if' scenario can be fun and i am open minded enough try anything once. But not to the point where it becomes a mental masturbation. ( this is how many contract audiophile nervosa ) :-D*After all, the bottom line should be about music and enjoying it. If you can't do that, no matter how you've built the system, it's no good. If you can enjoy your music on your system, that is all that counts. Having said that though, it is the very fact that music reproduction and system building is so subjective that makes it harder for us to communicate.*
Agreed.
*The fact that someone can take what is a truly terrific product and mate it with something that is a truly horrific product and then blame the wrong product is typically the result of lack of organization and understanding.*
yeah.. but you know.. someone else might think that 'horrific' products or systems acutally wonderful. haha.
*I am by nature a "techno-geek" because i not only want things to work "right", but i want to know how / why they work and if they aren't, what it takes to make them perform as expected. Obviously, others are more than content to just flip a switch or two and enjoy the presentation, regardless of how or why it is the way it is.*
I might be interested *how* particular gear works to my liking or if i hear a certain sonic fingerprint find out *why* that is. It can be fascinating even for non-technical mind like mine.
In general tho, I am not interested in how things work. I am more interested in the results the technology brings and I tend not to think about hardware or innerds as much as I found those things are ultimately irrelevant for my decision making on the hardware.
"yeah.. but you know.. someone else might think that 'horrific' products or systems acutally wonderful. haha."That's my whole point. Due to the fact that most people don't know how to listen or what to listen for, they are easily fooled and manipulated. By taking the guesswork out of the equation and combining both the ears of a skilled listener and the measurements of high grade test equipment, one can obtain far superior results. Without having some way to quantify and judge a product, there is no point of reference and the results are skewed. As such, diamonds rank just as high as dirt when subjectivity rules. After all, from a dung beetle's point of view, fecal matter is FAR more valuable than a diamond, gold, silver, oil, coal, etc... Without some set of references and guidelines, the diamond's are disposed of and the fecal matter is praised. After all, the dung beetle's opinion is just as valid as mine, right ?
If you doubt this, pick up a copy of ANY audiophile approved glossy that is published in the USA and look at the products that are being covered / glorified and then think about those that are over-looked. If audiophiles want to know why this industry / hobby are in trouble, it's probably because audiophiles are gullible and want everything BUT the truth fed to them on a spoon. The truth tastes bad and you have to deal with the facts. Snake oil helps the empty promises slide down so much easier that they've gotten used to the taste and even desire it now. As for me, i'd rather know what the facts are make my decision based on what will give me the best results. That's why i learned how things work and how to interpret specifications for myself. Otherwise, i'd end up believing the colourful prose that the "guru's" foist upon us in print while disregarding the cold, hard facts that are right next to it. Sean
>
*By taking the guesswork out of the equation and combining both the ears of a skilled listener and the measurements of high grade test equipment, one can obtain far superior results. Without having some way to quantify and judge a product, there is no point of reference and the results are skewed.*The resutls are always going to be mixed.
Since I dont' believe in consensus, the only result i'm interested in is what I like.*Otherwise, i'd end up believing the colourful prose that the "guru's" foist upon us in print while disregarding the cold, hard facts that are right next to it.*
um.. I guess I don't need a reinforcement army to back up what I hear or feel. Sure, I made many blunders before, but that's a conscious decision I made not influenced by anyone. As you realise audio is very subjective. Why on earth anyone listen to anybody on such a personal matter is beyond me.
Audiophile pubs and reviews are good for two things.
To learn what's out in the market place and hopefully *some* entertainment value. ( i gotta say it is getting fewer and fewer, tho )
My experience is that when a system that consists of well selected high grade components is fully dialed in, the "controversy" and "personal preferences" tend to fade away. That is, "accurate musicality" sounds good to everyone since it is both natural and accurate. Sean
>
Also since every record have different equalizations (some are bass heavy and some are not, some have warmer or sharper sound and some don't, etc...) and sound, then by having an accurate system, the listener will hear "true" sound of the record :)
I especially like your following paragraph:"The fact that someone can take what is a truly terrific product and mate it with something that is a truly horrific product and then blame the wrong product is typically the result of lack of organization and understanding. By minimizing those variables, we can only hope to improve performance on the whole for everyone. That is, for those that are seeking "musical accuracy" on the whole and not just their own version of "musical bliss via personally preferred colourations".Yes, it is all about minimizing the variables so if a system is lacking, we know what to tackle :)
I don't know if we think alike or not, but at least having SOME form of a plan will get you further than trying to wing it as you're pushed out of the plane : ) Sean
>
HowdyI agree that transparent cables are the best choice. I just have no experience to indicate that we can agree on which cables those are. I have my favorite speaker cables but some of my friends think they are too small of a gauge to sound good (tho they don't complain about the bass at my house) and other think they can't be good because they're silver (but they don't complain about the high's at my house.) etc.
It's still a fact that many people choose components which aren't ideal and that ideal cables won't be the best answer for them. Tho it would be better if I didn't need them, I do like have extra cables around so I can see which work best when I buy something new.
"It's still a fact that many people choose components which aren't ideal and that ideal cables won't be the best answer for them.{What do you mean "many people"??? The mass MAJORITY of people choose components which aren't ideal because MOST components are under-designed pieces of junk. The fact that some components are VERY non-linear yet get rave reviews should tell us what the "State of the Art" means today according to the "reviewing guru's". That is, a good review means nothing in terms of absolute performance. It used to be that 90% of the stuff made was marginal and 10% was worth checking out. If we are to believe the batch of current day reviewers that we have, 90% of the gear is exceptional and 10% is marginal.
As a side note, if a cable or component can't pass some simple steady state test tones in a linear manner, how is it going to respond to non-linear complex signals that vary in amplitude and timing on a dynamic basis like that of music?
"Tho it would be better if I didn't need them, I do like have extra cables around so I can see which work best when I buy something new."
So, what you are telling us is that you either:
A) feel the need to "band-aid" your equipment choices by substituting cables as tone controls
or that
B) many of the components that you purchase are built and designed to varying standards and that various cabling can help bridge the gap between those standards.
While i'd like to believe that many audiophiles choose "B", my guess is that they end up actually doing "A" because they don't know how to test or listen to achieve the linearity and level of performance that those that knowingly choose "B" strive to achieve.
As a side note, i'm not real familiar with the majority of Tony's posts, so i might have read more or less into what he was trying to say. Sean
>
HowdyOne of the reasons I didn't want to respond is that it's all been said before and is in the archives, and also I thought you were just being argumentative, but since you don't appear to be, I'll jot down some thoughts.
Each piece of hardware is built to a price point. And conversely we all have different environmental problems to deal with. So, for example, few power supplies in audio components that are sold are robust enough to deal with extremely harsh noise on the mains that some people suffer with, nor would we all want to pay for such robust power supplies. Similarly in a very RFI and EMI clean environment very little if any shielding may be needed on various cables and still one may get great sound. Conversely heavy shielding on cables may cause a loss of clarity in those cables compared to unshielded versions of otherwise the same cable.
For example: Power cords. I've used 9.5 gauge cords (I have 10 gauge dedicated lines), but they don't sound nearly as good (the resultant sound isn't nearly as quick) as when I use Shunyata Taipans which are a smaller conductor, but obviously are better in some way (perhaps inductance) in spite of the higher gauge. This is true both for my amps which have a traditional linear supply and my DAC which has a switching supply. Or perhaps I just need the shielding of the Taipans? Anyway as I mentioned it's great to have spare cords to see what works the best with a new component.
Similarly a high efficiency speaker has lower requirements for raw current carrying capability than a more efficient speaker. It's silly to suggest that the ideal speaker cable for a high efficiency speaker is the best for a lower efficiency speaker. (If for no other reason than that a cable for a high efficiency speaker may just be cheaper than the cable that's necessary for a lower efficiency speaker.) Also the shielding argument I mentioned above is relevant for speaker cables, tho probably less so than for interconnects or power cords. But one could argue that if people are hearing differences by suspending cables off of the floor that perhaps some shielding might be useful, or perhaps lifting the cables is cheaper and less disruptive than shielding :)
I'm not arguing for voodoo here, but even just the known obvious factors/parameters, say LCR models for speakers, amps, cables, etc. don't give simple answers to the best cable for a given situation. Let alone the dynamic properties that the simple models don't reflect. I do use my technical background to help guide me to what components/cables/tweaks to try when I'm augmenting or upgrading my system, but even so the best thing to do after reading specs., etc. is to listen to the various possible choices.
-Ted
P.S. If it's not obvious I don't buy into the arguments that most components are junk or that most audiophiles are just hunting in the dark.
I agree with a lot of what you said, particularly about items being built to a price point, but even then, many overlook very simple things that do make an audible difference.When i can take apart an $3500 amplifier and pull an excess of 4+ feet of wire out of it and at the same time, re-route the existing wire to what will end up placing it in a more appropriate pathway further from the transformer and rectifiers, there's something wrong.
When i can take apart a multi-thousand dollar speaker and reduce the amount of connections in one crossover from 61 down to 23 without changing the circuitry one iota, there's something wrong. For the record, this was achieved by laying out the crossover parts in a more efficient manner, allowing us to remove dozens of jumpers and the extra connections previously mentioned. Between the two speakers, we went from 122 connections on the crossover boards down to 46!!!
When i can take apart an interconnect that cost $1000+ dollars and find solder connections that are brittle and the wire is barely touching the jack, something is wrong.
When i can take apart "audiophile approved" speakers and find telephone wire ( literally ) in the middle of the signal path for both the mid-woofer and the tweeter, and it is connected to just one pole of a double pole switch, there's something wrong.
When i can take apart a power amp and find the input wiring and / or the speaker cabling laying on top of the AC cord, there's something wrong.
When i can take apart a speaker and find that multiple large woofers are wired up with generic low grade 18 gauge zip cord that is turning green, there's something wrong.
When i can take apart a preamp and see that all of the input and output signals are running through a $2 ribbon cable, something is wrong.
When i can take apart a pair of speakers and find that the left midrange is wired out of phase from the one in the right speaker, and that one cabinet has damping material and the other doesn't, there's something wrong.
I think that you get the idea, or at least i hope you do.
EVERY audio component that i have ever owned or has passed through my hands has been opened and inspected. Take it from me, most of this stuff is built to a price point and that price point isn't nearly as high as the manufacturers, distributors and retailers want you to think. Rather than paying for materials that will make a difference, they are spending your hard earned money on providing you with billet faceplates, fancy cosmetics and "pretty blue lights". Instead of spending this money to correct the under-sized and under-filtered power supplies and poorly laid out components, they squander it on frivolous crap that doesn't make any difference at all. If we wanted stuff that looked like art but was built and performed sub-par, we bould buy B&O or Bose. Since we want more and are willing to pay for it, the manufacturers should hold their end up and deliver something that is both well designed and built using high grade parts with at least a touch of quality control.
I'll stick by what i've said. Most products can be EASILY tweaked and improved for pennies on the dollar. That is because they are under-designed pieces of junk. If this weren't true, all of the guys making a living as "modifiers" wouldn't have more work than they can handle. Sean
>
HowdyWell, perhaps you're just buying junk :)
We'll just have to disagree, as I said we have different world views.
Ted, i work on electronics for a living. I'm not just talking about my gear, but also that of my friends and family. For the record, both my Brother and Father are audiophile's, so i've seen the insides of everything that they and many others have purchased. As such, i am buying "junk". So is everyone else : ) Sean
>
HowdyI know that your experience doesn't match mine, and it does match some friends of mine who buy different things. So we have different experience and beyond that we attribute the things you describe to different causes.
HowdyNope, to A or to B. But I'm not going to argue about it, you obviously have your world view and I mine.
I thought we were having an open discussion with various points of view, information supporting those points of view and ideas as to how and why we arrived at those points of view being exchanged. When did we start arguing? : ) Sean
>
HowdyOK, Sorry I chose too strong of words.
I don't buy into your choices for A and B. But as I didn't say so well: I don't really feel like having a discussion of it.
No problem. Maybe we can "discuss things" next time. Best wishes and good listening : ) Sean
>
HowdyRight now I am enjoying Telarc's 1812 SACD all over again since I moved a desk out of the way between my right rear speaker and my listening chair. It's great! (I remember the first time I played it on my new speakers, my brother was visiting and when the cannons went off he yelled "You crazy sonofabitch!" I guess he wasn't expecting me to break my speakers in at 110 dB :)
They all sound different because the grain of the copper, the impurities in the metals, assembly of components,etc..
even 2 cables of the same make/model could sound different because of copper -silver grain differences from casting or molding (whatever process they use). That why I use glass toslink, glass is glass is glass.
meaning I believe their is more consistency with the glass process.
But back to cables...that why we are inmates..to help each other be crazy.lol :)
...that "certified" Oxygen Free High-Conductivity (OFHC) Copper is 99.99% pure. So you can't use the copper impurity argument :)
FYI: glass is not glass is not glass. If you're going to propose that metal cables sound different because of impurities and differences in manufacturing processes, then you should recognize that glass also falls under these conditions.
prove it
you ever read about glass windows that have color matching/grain problems or transistors...silicon purity for windows or transistors is SOTA and can't really improve.
There are various grades of glass and there are dozens of processes used to manufacturer glass. Glass is full of impurities, and most of glass engineering has to do with how to get those impurities out via innovative manufacturing processes. Take a look at your window pane glass and a pane of Opticlear or PPG Starphire; the differences in glass quality (and price) is readily evident. Museums are careful in their glass selection, with emphasis on correct spectral transmittance (especially at different viewing angles) and UV absorbtion. Want some numbers? Let's take a look at Starphire for instance:Light transmittance through high quality cast acrylic is 92%. Light transmittance through Starphire glass is 91.3%. Light transmittance through regular glass is around 88%, but significantly lower at both ends of the visible range.
For example, transmittance of 400 nm wavelength through regular glass is 84.6%, 440 nm is 88.5%, 500 nm is 89.9%, 620 nm is 87.7%, 680 nm is 83.5%, 700 nm is 82.2%, 720 nm is 80.6%, 740 nm is 79.4%, 760 nm is 77.8%.
By comparison, transmittance of 400 nm wavelength through Starphire glass is 91.2%, 440 nm is 91.2%, 500 nm is 91.4%, 620 nm is 90.7%, 680 nm is 90.0%, 700 nm is 89.7%, 720 nm is 89.4%, 740 nm is 89.1%, 760 nm is 88.8%.
I'm sure toslink cables all use top-notch glass that doesn't differ much from one to the other. Then again, I think most premium copper cables use OFC copper that shouldn't differ much either.
you think most premium copper cables using OFC copper shouldn't differ mush either...what??
Inmate TomNY wrote a long review comparing pursang v. AZ silver ref 2 v.HT magiclink one. He heard some noticeable differences. (great review too!) Soo you think a cardas lightning sounds the same as a siltech and they sound like a kimber. lmao rof
"Think before you write"? lmao rof? You really needn't flame or troll.You realize what we're discussing is strictly subjective opinions, not quantifiable or supported by any conclusive empirical data, right? That Shoplifter hears a "big difference" is purely subjective. That he hears a difference at all is a subjective statement all on its own. If I think Kimber sounds like Cardas, or Monster sounds like Siltech (not that I do), I am neither right or wrong. It's purely subjective. Just because some reviewer said there is difference doesn't make it an absolute truth. If I say I am God, do you believe I am?
I think about what I write, and I'll state it again: OFC copper is OFC copper if you believe glass is glass. It's how a cable is shielded, arranged, and manipulated that probably makes up most of the difference people proport to hear.
inmate shoplifter in this stream states "cables can really make a big difference" They wouldn't make a big difference if they all sounded the same would they.
2 does corning have quality problems making a ton of grade 3c fiberoptic cable?
.... but I honestly don't know what you're talking about. No offense intended, but I can not understand the gist of your english, let alone its finer points.
And since I'm guessing you'd like moree empirical numbers, let's look at glass' differing chemical composition:The approximate chemical composition of Starphire glass is: silicone dioxide 73%, sodium oxide 15%, calcium oxide 10%, and trace elements 2%.
The approximate chemical composition of standard glass is: silicone dioxide 73%, sodium oxide 13%, calcium oxide 8%, and trace elements 6%
The difference in trace element composition will vary from glass to glass. So as SOTA as glass manufacturing is, it's far from consistent or identical.
I was a very thorough and informative response. But the information I passed to this website was from wireworld.com They produce the supernova5.
2. I been keeping up with the fiber-optic industry. purity and consistency and no longer techology issues with fiber...only thinness.
I really comes down to the supplier and good engineering.
HowdyI'm not so sure that you can make the case that all glass processes are more consistent than a wire process, but the point is that more than just the raw materials or the 'conductor' are important in a cable:
There is more than one glass fiber cable available and (presumably) they all sound different. I know, for example, that they are available with varying numbers of individual fibers in the bundle, etc. Also different manufacturers do different things with the connectors, e.g. spring loading, polishing, etc. It isn't the case that just because a cable is made of glass that it sounds the same as another cable made of glass.
If copper grain wasn't a problem, then why are high-end cable companies like dh labs, harmonic tech and acoustic zen promoting "single crystal copper conductors" ? if impurities wasn't a problem then why produce 7N's copper ? I use to work in the semi-conductor industry and it difficult to guarantee a silicon crystal slab w/o defects. (grain) Glass doesn't need to be 7N's or single crystal...
HowdyI never said that grain structure wasn't important. Note that some other cable manufactures try instead to use wire with an amorphous grain structure. I just state that it isn't obvious that the processes for making glass are more controlled than those for wire.
that was Al Pacino's name in 'Scarface' :-)
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: