Audio Cables Science or Religion? [Archive] - Audioholics Home Theater Forums

04-17-2003, 01:51 PM

I've been building my first 'real' HT/Music system for about the last year and a half. *In the course of building the system I've been scouring magazines and forums for information to help me build a decent system w/out spending too much money. *I just had an interesting expeirience with speaker cables that I thought I might share with you. *(I just read the rather scathing rebuttal of the AudioQuest 'FAQs')

My sytem is basically a Denon 3802, Panny CP72 DVD A/V, and Paradigm Monitor 7s L/R, CC 370 Center, Boston Accustic rears.

I had originally wired the system using a plain jane 16 to 18 gage speaker cable. *I originally bi-wired the fronts (I know that's a whole other diss.). *A freind of mine had access to an employee discount from Monster Cable and could get anything at about 70% of list. *So without too much research I settled on Z2 bi-wires for the fronts and a Z2 center. *Seemed like a #### of a deal. *It took about 3 months to get the cables and in that time I kind of became dis-enchanted with the whole exotic speaker cable thing. *I thought that with my system I probably wouldn't be able to hear much of a difference and worse my girlfriend would think that I was really foolish! *I became resigned to the idea that it would be mostly a cosmetic improvement.

We got the cables a week ago and hooked them up. *When we sat down the next day to really listen to the system. *My girfreind (very skeptical) surprised me and told me within the first track we listed to that she could hear a difference and thought that it sounded much clearer. I had to agree. *We were listening to the Buena Vista Social Club DVD Audio 2 channel stereo track. *We listened to several DVD-A and CDs, and I really think there was a significant audible improvement. *The speakers seemed a tad forward on the highs but with good clarity and detail before the cables. *They could be a little fatguing to listen to for long durations with music at high volume. *After the cable swap the highs were less forward with more detail and not fatiguing at all.

Now I personally believe that Monster is one of the worst offenders when it comes to cable marketing vodoo. *Much of the 'specifications' for their cables is a buch of marketing lingo dressed up as engineering that makes it impossible to tell what they really are doing in their cable design. *However their cables made a real sonic difference in my system. *Maybe the old cables had some defects, or its just the difference in gage.( I wouldn't know because Monster doesn't give the wire gage in their 'spec') *Also the idea of using cables as tone control (attenuating high frequency) seem to be a poor way of compensating for system defficiencies (sp?). *However, I think that the previous cables were potentialy causing the highs to be distorted (non-linear impedence vs. frequency?).

I think that after my experience that if one were to find good quality ( I know that's the hard part!) cables for the $100-$300 range they would be a good purchase. *Of couse companies like Monster make it almost impossible to tell what kind of quality your getting.

In doing a little more reaseach I came across a decent white paper on a cable company's site that you may want to check out. *The company is called Analysis Plus. *I ran across a review of their cables on Hometheaterhifi.com and a few other sites. *There short story is that they were/are a communications cable company that in the process of testing other cable companies speaker cables realized that most didn't perform well. *They decided to get into the market. *They approch seems to be very egineering/scientifically based. *In addition their cables seem to be not that expensive.

Check out their white paper. *I'd love to hear some response on it.

Mike

audioengr

04-17-2003, 08:29 PM

I have to be one of the minority of cable manufacturers that has applied engineering and science to cable design.  I can do this because I have designed electronics and interfaces for a number of large computer companies for the last 25 years.  I don't claim to have all of the answers, but my studies seem to support my theories pretty well so far, based on the performance of my cables as judged by numerous customers and reviewers.

Frankly, it is really difficult to operate in a field such as audio cables that is dominated by so much hype and pseudo-science.  If I were not such a perserverent person with faith in myself I would have abandoned this pursuit 10 years ago.  Instead, I have challenged myself with finding some of the answers, including new methods of measurement, new ABX tests and solid correlation between measurements and listening tests.  I plan to perform some of these tests this summer, when the cable trade typically slows down.

Something else to think about:  If an engineer is really talented and bright, why in the world would he waste his career doing audio cables when he could get stock options and a $100K+ salary at various fortune 500 computer companies?  I've already had such a career.

Best Regards,
Steve N.
http://www.empiricalaudio.com

Clint DeBoer

04-18-2003, 10:56 AM

Good feedback. I think it's important to understand the point of all of these recent discussions at AH as well... Namely that we're not saying cables never make a difference. What we're against is unscientific and false claims made by quasi-scientific voodoo peddlers out to make a buck off the unsuspecting.

There are some decent folks out there making appropriately-priced good quality cables and not marketing them with false hype and pseudo-science, but they seem to be in the minority.

For those selling their cables at over $100/ft, I think some detailed specs and test results should be provided to show how they differ from good-quality cables at 1/10 the price. If a difference is obvious and perceivable, it is certainly measurable.

And then there is the bottom line. We want to educate, but basically people have the right to spend their hard-earned money on whatever they want. We're not trying to save the world, but we would like to inform people of the potential for scams.

Dick Hertz

04-18-2003, 12:15 PM

The whole cable thing is just overloaded with hype and falsehoods. It doesn't help that the so-called golded eared types claim to be able to hear the difference between silver and copper wire, between teflon and vinyl insulation, or between gold and nickel connections. Then there's cable "break in" which is a whole 'nother can of worms. I've asked the question, "Just exactly what happens to a cable to break it in?" The answers are "skin effect" and "copper lattice integration" and all sorts of lame BS that doesn't translate in any meaningful way to audible differences. How 'bout "directionality"? You mean to say that once a cable (without an external ground) is used in one position, that it won't work just as well if you reverse it? Gotta follow the arrows, right?  And the great thing is the cable gurus do all of this with sighted testing. Who said anything about placebo effect? In any truly scientific field, the way cables are tested would be laughed out of the building. What are these cable guys afraid of? Either the audible differences are as "dramatic" as they often claim them to be, so they can be easily identified by anyone with normally functioning ears 100% of the time or just the products of an overgrown case of "audio nervosa". "I know what I hear" is a common reply. That's fine. Now show me you can identify the better sounding cable in a blind test in some statistically meaningful way.

Pat D

04-20-2003, 06:27 PM

There are so many strange ideas, many of them expensive, in audio and it is good to see someone who tells it as it is. *Unfortunately, many people take any argument against their beliefs as flaming

My friend, Eyespy, has some interesting material on audio myths and psychoacoustic references, as well as some links, on his website. *He has quite a nice system and himself uses some audio jewellery (as Dr. Floyd Toole called it), but makes no claims it improves the sound.

Eyespy's site (http://2eyespy.tripod.com/myaudioandhometheaterhomepage/index.html)

Bprest0n

04-23-2003, 01:45 PM

Good article, so who are you referring to when you say "audio forum cult hobbyists"  <img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':D'>

Do the letters AA ring a bell?

04-23-2003, 06:38 PM

Ahhh, yet another article that warms the cockels of my heart. *I couldn't have said it better myself Gene! <img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':D'>

I myself was briefly swayed and drawn in by the allure of fancy exotic cables. *I spent my money and realized I really didn't need to spend so much. *Since then I try to build my own if it seems cost-effective.

I like "audio jewelry" just as much as the next guy, perhaps even moreso, but there's no cable out there that looks cool enough to justify the hundreds of bucks they expect people to fork over. *And if cables' audible effect is less than what I would hear from a slight twist of say an EQ knob, why the heck should I care? *Aren't people interested in BIG improvements, not ones that MIGHT be audible if you were REALLY TRYING?

I also wonder why people are so quick to point to the wire as the component MOST responsible for what they are hearing, even when scientific evidence shows that the wire may not be effecting it that much. *When I've done critical listening (which isn't very much fun) I noticed that I was concentrating so hard on one thing (the vocal, the ride cymbal) in isolation that each play of the song seemed different and consequently I felt one component sounded different than another. *Certainly there are more variables at play than expensive wire alone. *But this doesn't get the attention like cables do for some reason.

Apparently it's more fun to buy a new toy for many people, even if said toy is as boring as a length of copper! *It takes all kinds I guess...

Anyway, keep giving 'em HE-LL Audioholics!

04-24-2003, 12:54 AM

This voodoo stuff in audio (not just related to cables) is due to very slack rules from governing bodies and marketing people knowing that the amount of people out there with the knowledge to know these claims are crap are few.  How many people out there find out that there is such a thing called skin effect yet actually research it to find out it has no difference in baseband audio signals (at least audible difference) and makes differences starting around RF frequencies?

And let's not even start the whole "break in" issue... what a crock!

Bprest0n

04-25-2003, 07:16 PM

Sorry Brian, but Audioholics already started debunking the "break in" issue  <img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':D'>

Take a look here:

Audioquest FAQ Debated (http://www.audioholics.com/FAQs/Audioquest.html)

05-13-2003, 01:52 AM

The way I look at it if I can hear a marked difference in cables then I don't care about the theory. I have spent thousands on cables over the years and can easily hear differences in my system. Some of you might think I am crazy but hey its my opinion an my money. Just like some of those high-end wine drinkers out there... <img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':laugh:'>

gene

05-13-2003, 12:05 PM

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The way I look at it if I can hear a marked difference in cables then I don't care about the theory. </td></tr></table>

Miles;

Nobody is arguing that cables can sound different.  However, we are questioning many of the claims these "exotic" cable vendors make to justify their prices.  Most of the claims these vendors make are based on half engineering truths, misapplications of engineering principles, or just plain wrong.  The problem arises when they convince the unknowning of their so called "theories" to lure them into buying their products.

What makes matters worse is when a cable vendor deliberately does things to the cables such as ultra high capacitance and/or inductance, to make them act as tone controls.  This is why we expend such an exhaustive efforts on cables by making consumers aware of these issues.

05-14-2003, 01:34 PM

See the lastest entertainment at the ''Asylum."

Cable Asylum (http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/cables/messages/75967.html)

I guess Teflon is now obsolete. <img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':D'>

05-16-2003, 02:01 AM

The thing with cables and interconnects is the maker(s) often try to say that their cables do things science cannot explain.  

One example is to say that capacitance is irrelevant since resistance is all that matters.  Basically what we are trying to achieve is the least coloration possible.  Colorations from cables in 4 different ways:

resistance
inductance
capacitance
interference (of any sort)

the first 3 come down to proper design and construction.  Using the right grade of metal (i refuse to go into the copper/silver debate), the right construction (whether it is zip, coax style, twisted pair, etc), and the right termination (using a pin made of aluminum isnt exactly a good thing).  Your goal in this stage is a feat of compromise, get the best balance of each while striving for the lowest readings possible.

Now interference, can be anything from corrosion of copper wires (that green stuff is NOT conductive), to emi emissions from other cables (mains cables mostly).  for the corrosion, through the cable, replace it if you think it's affecting anything (anyone who honestly buys the "strand-jumping" theory should be fine with this corrosion since it should alleviate "strand-jumping" one way or another), but for the termination, ALWAYS solder.  I can't stress it enough. Crimps are good, but a solder connection will stop air from reaching the contact point or the wire.  No air, nothing to make oxides with (corrosion).

To deal with the emi interference, all you need is a good shield.  Grounded foil shields are quite common in the telecom industry (the cables have a special ground cable on each end that attaches to a ground lug on the equipment on each end. Some new ones have special jacks and cable connectors so there is no need to run a wire to a ground lug, also gives a better ground).  Trust me, when you have 1200 phone lines in 2 square feet of equipment face, emi interference is the highest priority.  If it's good enough for them, it's definately good enough for us.

But, if you want to drop your money on a cable due to its looks, or any other factor then go ahead.  Just remeber that everything physical can be measured, and measurements don't lie.

---
About wine, you can chemically ananlyze wine to know how it will taste too, it's just prohibitively expensive.  Same goes for cigars, beers, foods, etc.  

And yes, I do use zip cord...why?  It works.  No frills, no surprises, it just works.  And look inside your speakers sometime.

laters, peace all.

-Nutz

05-16-2003, 02:33 AM

I forgot one other thing...if a speaker cable cannot do what it's supposed to on it's own merit, it needs to be re-designed.

I am talking smack about Zobel's being added to the cable to stop oscillations.  That is just ridiculous that such a thing needs to be added to a cable.  Zobel networks do have their place, and that place should be either in an amp or inside the speaker.  I would lean more towards having it in the speaker, if an amp has one, they are just expecting people to do bad things to it.

It's like if a tick is biting you...do you just numb your arm somehow or remove the tick?  I'd say remove the tick, since the cause of the issue is gone instead of being covered up. Much like the pains that amp is feeling will be numbed through applying that zobel, when replacing the offending cable would be a better solution.

I'm ranted out for the day, g'night all.

-Laters

Nutz

gene

05-16-2003, 12:26 PM

Nutz;

Your post does not match your name  <img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':;):'>

Thank you very much for sharing your sensible assessment with everyone here on our cable forum.  I am quite pleased with everyones responses here.  It seems that many audio hobbyists have more sensible viewpoints about cables than some exotic cable manufacturers sometimes credit them for. I agree with all of the points you have raised, and given my telecom background, I can personally vouch for the importance of twisted pair, and well shielded interconnects and sometimes speaker cables, in a very noisy EMI/RFI environments.

05-20-2003, 12:47 AM

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Guest : .... but for the termination, ALWAYS solder. *I can't stress it enough. Crimps are good, but a solder connection will stop air from reaching the contact point or the wire. *No air, nothing to make oxides with (corrosion).

To deal with the emi interference, all you need is a good shield. *Grounded foil shields are quite common in the telecom industry (the cables have a special ground cable on each end that attaches to a ground lug on the equipment on each end. Some new ones have special jacks and cable connectors so there is no need to run a wire to a ground lug, also gives a better ground). *Trust me, when you have 1200 phone lines in 2 square feet of equipment face, emi interference is the highest priority. *If it's good enough for them, it's definately good enough for us.
Nutz,

A couple of points.

A proper crimp is a cold weld, it is by definition, air tight.  Unless actual liquids entire the area of the crimp, and corode fro the edges of the crimp in, then it will do no worse than a solder joint.  I wil note that by the time this becomes an issue for a proper crimp, that the solder joint will also be corroded.

Second, equating the phone line requirements to audio is not exactly kosher.  Limited bandwidth signals with a limited dynamic range, with specialized grounding practice does not mean that a simple foil shield will suffice for analog audio use.

Besides, I guess you have never heard other folks talking in the background on a long distance line before.

Jon Risch

05-20-2003, 01:47 AM

With crimps, yes a good crimp should be air tight, but even with the proper crimp dies (and I also suspect most people buy one of those crimper/stripper/cutter abominations that really don't work all too well), I have always seen some form of oxidation of the conductor upon loosening the crimped connector and slioding the wire out. I feel its better to have any kind of oxidation outside of the joint, and not inside.  That is why I prefer to solder the joints.  

Also note that air molecules are far smaller than evporated water molecules, which are in turn smaller than normal water molecules.  If water can get in, so can air.  

Given though, this point seems to have followers on both ends, and is about as religious to some as the whole burn-in debate is for some.

About telco apps.

When I was talking about telco apps, I was talking about T-1 lines in particular, not POTS. POTS lines vary widely in quality from region to region. POTS stands for Plain Old Telephone Service, and is used to discern from it and analog trunk lines, digital trunks, fiber, etc.

T-1 lines have a higher standard for signal quality and reliability.  Also T-1 equipment tend to be very high density.  Imagine a unit the size of 3 standard sized recievers with 50 T-1 lines coming out of it...thats a capacity of 1200 callers.

For POTS lines, the factors that can cause your crosstalk issue is quite complicated, but the major factors are the premise wiring on both ends, the switching systems used through the entire route of your call, and the presence of a PBX on either end. Some PBXs don't play well with certain switching equipment/other PBXs...which leads to a very noticable echo.

In cross-country calls crosstalk is very common, and can at most times be narowed down to switching equipment differences.  See in europe they use a different telephony standard than us, and the general signal parameters are quite different.  I am not sure about what switching systems are used in the other continents however.

Also in many rural areas the lines and switching equipment are generaly ignored until a good number of service complaints are filed.  So it's not too uncommon to find crossbar swithes still in use (which are notorious for crosstalk).

If you are so bothered by foil shields, european spec for telehony cable EMI grounds is a 9th wire in the cable that is only fou grounding purposes.  Some hardware makers here in the states choose to use it on their gear though.  Mostly in order to make their gear pass FCC testing.

Either way, if adding extra EMI grounding makes you feel good, go for it.  I just feel that the return would be negligible.  I do not have the money to go to FCC labs to verify however.  Maybe we can take to the EMI dicussion to another thread sometime.

well, take care man.  It's been good chatting.

-Nutz

Bob2of3

06-01-2003, 05:12 AM

Now can someone actually name these exotic cable companies? Where is the data that proves theses cables aren't all they claims to be.

I'm new to this HT thing but not internet forums so I'm not bent cause I think my cable are getting flamed, I just need to get edumacated <img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':p'>

LAter

gene

06-02-2003, 12:34 PM

Bob;

The proof is in the pudding.  Here you go.

Speaker Cable Face Off (http://audioholics.com/techtips/audioprinciples/interconnects/SpeakerCableFaceoff.htm)

There will be many others to follow as we are just beginning  <img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':D'>

07-09-2003, 05:41 AM

Dear Everyone,

I am writing from Hungary and I tried to follow your discussion about cables. I would like to tell you that we (together with my friends) have developed a totally new cable technology based on new physics! It means that this cable seems to be the best of the world as we haven't found any better one to compete with! We do have interconnect and speaker cable as well, as we use the same technology in both cable type. This cable is a result of a 20 year hard-working, developing and brainstorming. We are ready for any comparison test as we are sure of our truth! The difference between the "usual" cables and our cable is so big that you will firstly don't believe your ears! The technolgy is for sale and it works everywhere where cables are used between electronic euipment!
If someone is interrested in revolutionary technology, please contact: tagaigabor@vnet.hu * tel: +3620-320-6998 *
Bye!
Gabor[B][I]

audioengr

07-17-2003, 02:38 PM

nutz wrote:
<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">One example is to say that capacitance is irrelevant since resistance is all that matters.  Basically what we are trying to achieve is the least coloration possible.  Colorations from cables in 4 different ways:

resistance
inductance
capacitance
interference (of any sort)</td></tr></table>

Well, you forgot one important one, that is dielectric absorption.  This is why bare-wire interconnects sound so good and also why polystyrene capacitors sound better than the other types.

Also, these parametrics are not all important in all cases.  In the case of interconnects capacitance and dielectric absorption dominate.  In the case of speaekr cables, inductance, resistance and dielectric absorption dominate.  The other parameters cause second-order effects.  All it takes is a few SPICE simulations to demonstrate this.

Irvrobinson

12-07-2004, 08:57 PM

I think the situation is worse than even you think, Gene. I was browsing the discussion forums on Audiogon and found that people believe there are audible differences between properly functioning electrical outlets! I was shocked. I've read the power cord nonsense for years, but outlets? I asked people what they thought there could be audible differences between outlets, and the replies were simply fascinating. Many people believed factors that would cause audible differences either couldn't be measured, or involved factors that were not understood by our notions of the behaviors of 120VAC electricity. Ultimately I was told to "shut up", "go away", and I was called closed-minded and unscientific. Audiogon stopped accepting my posts on three different threads! I was amazed. I just wondered how such differences could occur.

I can almost understand how someone with no basic knowledge of electricity could be led to think that similar, well-designed interconnects or speaker cables can be audibly different. At least they're in the signal path, and they have some measurable differences. But electrical outlets? Now I've heard it all.

I think you guys are doing the hobby a great service by going through the trouble to actually run tests (however inconsequential the measured differences might be) and explain the technical aspects of cable theory in understandable form. Personally, I think the biggest problem we have in audio (and video) is not the snake oil from manufacturers, it is from people that want to hear differences in everything, whether valid or not, because it's just plain more exciting. Do you blame drug dealers or the users that demand it? I've come to the conclusion that snake oil cable vendors really are just responding to market demand.

gene

12-07-2004, 09:49 PM

Irvrobinson;

Thanks for your kind words and vote of confidence. Its difficult some times to sift through whats real and whats marketing. Its even worse when review publications endorse the marketing nonsense as truth and futher confuse consumers. We do our best to keep it real and always look for other audioholics to help us pursue the truth in audio!

Steve1000

12-07-2004, 10:22 PM

I'm glad to see you didn't use the cable believer vs. religion analogy in the article.

Religion at least makes an attempt to provide explanations and values for subjects not, or at least not yet, adequately accounted for by science. Religion provides at the very least a mythical and ethical framework for matters that are as of yet not entirely within our analytical comprehension. Science edges in on religion slowly.

By comparison, from an intellectual point of view, expensive cables are nothing but entirely trivial lies and nonsense that are totally inconsistent with what is already well-understood by science. "Cable belief," so to speak, is a useless doctrine other than for purposes of making money off of some folks who lack an adequate understanding of a very difficult subject (electronics) and who perhaps have a weakness for wanting the best equipment for a sense of status or, more sadly and innocently, just for the passion for having the best sound possible. It is, in short, an intellectual fraud.

It's nice to see the audioholics board getting a little more traffic -- it's a little harder to draw a crowd when your stock in trade is "pursuing the truth." :cool:

I have just written a new article that discusses how different people view cables.  Please join in the discussion and feel free to add your take.

http://www.audioholics.com/techtip....ce.html (http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/audioprinciples/interconnects/audiocablesreligion-or-science.html)

gene

12-07-2004, 11:14 PM

Steve you should be writing for us ;) Whats your background?

Steve1000

12-08-2004, 08:35 AM

:) You're most kind.

I don't discuss my "background" while discussing hot-button issues on internet chatboards. Feel free to PM me if you're truly interested. :cool:

Steve you should be writing for us ;) Whats your background?

Irvrobinson

12-08-2004, 12:58 PM

Here's a question for you Gene...

I was exchanging email with someone reading the threads I mentioned earlier on Audiogon, where I was apparently censored, and he asked a very interesting question. His position was that I was posting opinions that were in direct conflict with the philosophy of people known to be affiliated with Audiogon. To quote his email, "Would Audioholics continue to accept postings from people that asserted cables and power cords and outlets made an audible difference, and subjective testing was enough to prove it?" His guess is that you would not, and that, therefore, my expectations are unreasonable with Audiogon. Would you censor postings that run counter to your philosophy?

Irv

MDS

12-08-2004, 01:03 PM

I think it's obvious the answer is no. See the 'Dogmatism in science' thread. Lots of proponents of pseudo-science and unsubstantiated subjective reasoning (to me at least, because I agree with the objective, scientific side).

Audioholics has not censored the thread in any way. They just let the heated debate continue as long as personal attacks are minimized.

gene

12-08-2004, 09:46 PM

His guess is that you would not, and that, therefore, my expectations are unreasonable with Audiogon. Would you censor postings that run counter to your philosophy?

We only censor threads when people become offensive or rude towards others, or they debate politics and religion, or they spam our forums. We welcome all viewpoints regardless if we disagree. This is a democratic website :)

I don't understand why some folks continually think we don't believe sonic differences in cables exist. We clearly state they do, but with only poorly designed cables.

Irvrobinson

12-10-2004, 07:54 PM

I don't understand why some folks continually think we don't believe sonic differences in cables exist. We clearly state they do, but with only poorly designed cables.

Gene, with all due respect, you know that real issue is that many audiophiles believe that are audible differences between properly designed cables (and outlets and plugs), and that is the basis of their issue with your (our, actually) position. So it strikes me as a bit disingenuous to state you believe there are audible differences, but wait... only if there we're discussing poor designs. I think EVERYONE is willing to believe that poor design sometimes causes audible side effects.

Nonetheless, I am heartened by your posting policies. For those of you that want you to entertained (or appalled - both will happen) try browsing the Audiogon forum. I think I'll hang around here for awhile.

jaxvon

12-10-2004, 08:43 PM

I would also like to add that when Gene says "poorly designed", he's most likely speaking about Esoteric cables that are marketed and thought of by many as being well designed and superior, when in actuality they are a hinderance in the system. Such an example of this is the Goertz cable from the first Speaker Cable Faceoff. It actually started rolling off frequencies before 20kHz. That, and if I recall correctly, it required a Zobel network to function properly. No one would want that kind of garbage in his or her system (if they knew it did that).

Irvrobinson

12-11-2004, 01:51 AM

[Note to self - proof-read before you post. Your grammar was atrocious in that last one.]

Jaxvon, I agree. But pity the poor cable vendors! When zip cord performs so well you must have to look really different to convince people there's an audible difference.

Frankly, I'm most fascinated by the fixation on power cords and outlets. Did you know you can pay $180 for a single power outlet? I have trouble hearing differences between good quality CD players, and some folks think swapping 12 gauge power cords can dramatically change how a system sounds! Can anyone think of how this would occur?

In retrospect, perhaps I was a bit harsh on Gene. I suppose one can go out of one's way to produce visible differences (the Goertz is a good example), with the result being cables that actually perform poorly enough to be audibly different. I reluctantly stand corrected. :-)

jaxvon

12-11-2004, 01:58 AM

Yeah, I'm appalled by the power cord and outlet thing too. I actually started a thread on the outlet thing because I was so amazed. I was surfing Parts Express (great place, no BS) when I found they were selling a WattGate "Audio Grade" duplex outlet for something like $120. I don't blame PE for selling it, but I was just amazed that people would pay for that. What's even better is that the contacts are gold plated. It makes sense for interconnects, but considering how much duplex outlets get used, it's just stupid. If you really, REALLY want to see some crazy stuff, check out JPS Labs (www.jpslabs.com). They sell a $3500 power cord and also some rediculously expensive outlets.

What's sad is that people seem to think that a power cord will act like a power conditioner, when that's just not true.

Oh well. At least people here can see the light!

Transducergeek

03-14-2005, 05:41 AM

I hear more of a "difference" in sound, if I listen to music when I wake up in the morning, versus the evening period for listening. I hear a "difference" whether the lights are on or off. I also hear a "difference" if I had a glass of wine before listening or no wine before... What I am saying is, the psychological effects of the "experience" is contributing to the "sound" also. I dare say perhaps more than speaker wire and RCA cables that cost 1400 percent more than some others you might buy for, say, 75 cents a foot?

I owned and engineered as a full time carrer in my recording studio for over 10 years in the 70's, and I know none of the hundreds of yards of mic cables and console wiring or patch panel TRS connectons or Mastering Tape decks, had any of this exotic "silver soldered" or "Pure copper oxygen free wire" used in their fabrication. And still, myself and my recording friends around Los Angeles in the 60's and 70's achieved some of the greatest sounding recordings ever made. How did we do that without all the "magic" wire interconnects? I can tell you how, THEY DON'T MATTER!!! A few measley inches of wire at line level from a preamp to power amp hardly matters at all..... How many dozens of Yards of "low grade" cable did the low level signal go through before it got to the studio mic preamp, then at line level to the tape deck, back to the console for mixing then to the 2 channel tape deck for recording then to the play deck to the disc cutting mastering lathe facility all that before it gets to, let alone leaves your preamp? ... What does matter? Mics matter, Preamps matter, well set up decks matter, good tape matters, exotic, expensive ultra special Silver Cables don't matter, ... But people hear what they want to believe they hear..... The end....

MDS

03-14-2005, 01:36 PM

Creeping Death

10-30-2005, 02:01 PM

I really dislike the tactics some of these companies use to market their wares(ie.Monster cable). Now I am by no means a true Audioholic but I like my music and home theatre even if it is on an aging Technics amp with just the old Dolby prologic surround sound on mismatched speakers. Any way I was in one of those Big box stores about a year ago and they had a display set up with a DVD player, and some sort of splitter running to a wide screen TV, the screen was split in to two parts straight down the middle and was supposed to be showing the difference between the almighty Monster cable and just a generic cable. Now you could clearly tell the difference between the two halves of the screen, one side was visually a cleaner picture than the other which had what I would call pixel crawl (don't know if that is the correct technical term, but you know what I mean) especially on flat edges and text. So I decided to take a closer look and I think everyone interested in reading this forum knows what I found, one side was hooked up to an S-video Monster cable and the other was hooked up to a generic composite cable. That is almost bordering on criminal! We all know for a fact that if they had hooked up one Monster S-video and one generic S-video cable that say came bundled with your last video card to that splitter you most defiantly would not see the difference unless the generic one was of VERY poor quality.
The problem is that people are willing to believe demonstrations like this because they are uninformed but they can see the difference. Now if that $40 or $50 cable makes that much difference on the TV it must make that much difference on that brand new stereo they want you to buy complete with a couple of hundred dollars worth of Monster Cables, right? I don't think so!
Great site.