Oh no, not cables again, but...

[lurker10]

I am still amazed at the amount of ink/bits spent on reviews and discussions of cables. I am firmly in the Audioholics snakeoil school of thought, but can anyone explain why so many people still ascribe large changes in the sound of their system when they change cabling? I've seen reviews by users and reviewers that are so detailed about the differences in interconnects and power cords that you almost start believing them. Having read the AH articles, and having listened to a very few different cables in my system, I just don't hear any differences. I have a pretty "resolving" system, too

I do hear differences between CD players (using their analog connections) and preamps.

Is this just mass placebo effect?

 

[gene]

Is this just mass placebo effect?

Yes. Its mostly a scam, especially since audio is so nebulous to people.

 

[jaxvon]

Right. I'm sure you've heard of Transparent Cable, right? Well, they are, just like every other super-exotic cable company, only out to make a ridiculous amount of money. Want proof? Check out this photo from CEDIA:

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=1900&d=1126714220

 

[Hi Ho]

High end cables are snake oil. The only time I ever heard a difference was when I went from some really cheesy analog RCA cables (maybe 1mm thick) to some home made ones using RG-6 cable.

I make my own cables with RG-6 and will never buy any premium or even moderately priced cables because I do not believe there is any benefit at all other than looks. The cables are behind my system. No one can see them. I don't give a damn about what my cables look like.

For other cables like HDMI which are not easily self made, I will go with a reputable manufacturer like BlueJeans or Dayton when I end up needing one.

Speaker cables, I think, are the biggest offenders. As long as you are using the correct guage (14 AWG is good for 99% of installations) I believe any differences are nothing more than perceived. People want to justify the exhorbitant amount of money they just spent on those speaker cables so the placebo effect takes place.

Keep up the good work, Audioholics, keep telling it like it is.

 

[Buckle-meister]

Check out this photo from CEDIA...

Man, that darn Hoover is still stalking that woman.

Regards

 

[mulester7]

Man, that darn Hoover is still stalking that woman.

Regards

.....Buckle, that Hoover looks like a Harry Potter version.....

 

[Michael r]

Hi Ho Great to see that rare bird "common sense" is still alive and well in your report. I've tried many cables for spkrs and damned if I can hear any difference (to hell with " seeing "the difference!) -- the right wattage in the amp and away you go. At higher freqs ie tv signals on band1 and 3 which is much higher than audio freqs the difference in cable becomes an issue and even then over maybe 50 yds or so and then this loss can be cancelled by upping the transmitted signal strength anyway. 3/Questions: (1)My signal source (Satellite rx using scart out -- I take it I can't use the uhf output to drive the projector?) will be about 25/30 feet from my Panasonic PT-AE900U Projector -- will this be a problem? If so can I install an in-line amp to compensate for losses? (2)What dia. in mm is 14AWG
guage? (3) What observations can you make on using ordinary white paint for a screen? Will I see any difference if I use "the real thing? Best Regards, Michael r.

 

[Hi Ho]

1)My signal source (Satellite rx using scart out -- I take it I can't use the uhf output to drive the projector?) will be about 25/30 feet from my Panasonic PT-AE900U Projector -- will this be a problem? If so can I install an in-line amp to compensate for losses?

There shouldn't be a problem, though I'm not certain.

(2)What dia. in mm is 14AWG

14 AWG wire is about 1.6mm in diameter. That is just the actual wire. When I said the cheesy RCA cables were 1mm thick that included the jacket and that was coaxial cable. There is a chart on THIS page with the diameters of different wire guages.

(3) What observations can you make on using ordinary white paint for a screen? Will I see any difference if I use "the real thing?

A real screen will produce a more vibrant image than standard wall paint. However, you can shine a very decent image on a regular wall. Another option is ScreenGoo paint made specifically for that purpose.

 

[mtrycrafts]

but can anyone explain why so many people still ascribe large changes in the sound of their system when they change cabling? I've seen reviews by users and reviewers that are so detailed about the differences in interconnects and power cords that you almost start believing them. Having read the AH articles, and having listened to a very few different cables in my system, I just don't hear any differences. I have a pretty "resolving" system, too

It might be simple. One is greed after the feeding frenzy and gullibility of humans. Then, it would be very embarrassing to admit one was wrong all those years and then they would have to reexamine all their other audio beliefs. The financial hurt to the audio industry would be pretty big.
I have a friend who wrote reviews on a small scale. When I asked if he would listen under DBT, he said "what would I tell my readers if I couldn't hear a difference."






I do hear differences between CD players (using their analog connections) and preamps.

Is this just mass placebo effect?

Each case needs to be DBT tested

 

[indcrimdefense]

i have had numerous different interconnects in my system this year. when a salesperson tries to sell me some fancy cable, or tells me my system sound quailty will improve by 30% or some other ridiculous claim, i say that sounds fantastic, let me take some home & try them out. to my complete surprise, several dealers agreed, and some have sent demo interconnects along with demo equipment. i have yet to purchase any of them. all of them sounded fine, but none produced the audio nirvana promised so back they all went. i have at times thought that some of the interconnects sounded somewhat different from another, but whenever this happens i run the following test. i hook on one type of interconnect to the 2 channel audio output of my cd player, & the other interconnect to the front multichannel outputs, plug both in & then flip back & forth. i could ascertain some differences between a monster m850 & an audioquest king cobra, but not a difference that i was willing to pay 175 for. my favorite was when i could not tell the difference between accoustic research for about 25 and some exotic kimber for 200+.
the only exotic speaker cable i have demoed was kimber as well, and guess what no difference in comparison to my monster cable speaker wire (don't know what type, bought it off the reel in the store). the kimber was a bare wire hookup to the amp & speakers & the monster was banana plugs on both ends. i'm no monster fan, but it's what i bought before i knew better, and it has yet to be bettered by any hyperexotic cable i've tried. the only great thing i can say about the hyperexotic cables is that they are a hell of alot easier to connect & unconnect than monster's ridiculous turbine design, but then again the accoustic research cable i have is also easy to connect without a torture session.

 

[mustang_steve]

I do hear differences between CD players (using their analog connections) and preamps.

Is this just mass placebo effect?

Each case needs to be DBT tested

I say instead, the analog outputs from the CD player, and from the D/A converter used needs to be plotted out, and then compared for variances. After all, it's only audio after the electro-mechanical conversion at the speaker, before that it's just an electrical signal.

DBX testing is fine for speakers, but I say we need actual electronic analysis for components, just to weed out any politics from all of this.

 

[mtrycrafts]

DBX testing is fine for speakers, but I say we need actual electronic analysis for components, just to weed out any politics from all of this.

Yes, we can weed out the nonsense And, after a measurement, we can correlate them to psychoacoustics, threshold of detection. Not many are willing or want to though. May be embarrassing and then only other features on a component would be the selection process, as it should be in most cases anyhow.

 

[mtrycrafts]

when a salesperson tries to sell me some fancy cable, or tells me my system sound quailty will improve by 30% or some other ridiculous claim,

I'd like to see their faces explaining how they arrived at this 30%. I'd like to market that measuring stick


i run the following test. i hook on one type of interconnect to the 2 channel audio output of my cd player, & the other interconnect to the front multichannel outputs, plug both in & then flip back & forth.

I am a bit dense at times but I don't picture this hook up



i could ascertain some differences between a monster m850 & an audioquest king cobra,

A couple of possibility here. test protocol and/or bias.



accoustic research cable i have is also easy to connect without a torture session.

That is what it should be about.

To date, well designed interconnects have not been differentiated just by sound alone.

 

[mustang_steve]

Yes, we can weed out the nonsense And, after a measurement, we can correlate them to psychoacoustics, threshold of detection. Not many are willing or want to though. May be embarrassing and then only other features on a component would be the selection process, as it should be in most cases anyhow.

That's something I have been working on for the past few months on the side, is a way to do this accurately, from the input and output levels. The hard part is getting a "perfect" D/A converted waveform from a CD to use as a baseline for comparison. Reason is, without a untainted reference to compare to, it's going to be very hard to figure out what is right at the CD player level.

It would probably have to be a computer generated image base on a simulated D/A conversion process instead of a true converted audio signal...which seems wrong in a way to me.

Either way, I'm still searching for an ideal solution for this. Pretty much, since the specs I desire don't exist, I'd like to at least map it out on the gear I do own, and hopefully come up with a measuring assortment that most audiophiles can afford (considering how much some of these guys spend on cables, that might be pretty easy for some).

 

[mtrycrafts]

That's something I have been working on for the past few months on the side, is a way to do this accurately, from the input and output levels. The hard part is getting a "perfect" D/A converted waveform from a CD to use as a baseline for comparison. Reason is, without a untainted reference to compare to, it's going to be very hard to figure out what is right at the CD player level.

It would probably have to be a computer generated image base on a simulated D/A conversion process instead of a true converted audio signal...which seems wrong in a way to me.

Either way, I'm still searching for an ideal solution for this. Pretty much, since the specs I desire don't exist, I'd like to at least map it out on the gear I do own, and hopefully come up with a measuring assortment that most audiophiles can afford (considering how much some of these guys spend on cables, that might be pretty easy for some).

I think you are creating a problem, not looking for a solution, but that is only me.

What you need is a reference Cd with test tones, or a signal generator, measure it directly and you have your base line. Measure it at the input of a component and output, take the difference.
Even if your CD is not perfect, no such thing, you know what it has and differentiate input and output. Same CD on all components will give you consistent data differences.

Others have no problem measuring audio gear to a very low tolerance, well below thresholds of detecting.
Not sure where the problem is, but I get dense from time to time.

 

[runninkyle17]

First off let me state that I am not here to offend anyone. When I originally bought my system I hooked it up with some very cheap 16 AMG wire and went on my way. I bought a new set of speakers and figured that I might as well find some better speaker cable too. I looked at Monster, read reviews, tried to find the "magic" in the Monster brand and I found nothing. I am not saying Monster cable is bad, because I know that it is decent; just not worth the money.

So...I searched around for info about speaker cable and I found a lot!!! Unfortunately, like many of you have already mentioned, most of it was complete BS. I ended up just buying 100 meters of Belden Cat5 braiding it together so it would be around 12 AWG and so it didn't look like crap, terminating it with GLS locking bananas and BAM!

Now here comes the part where I might offend someone. The cable did make a difference in the sound (not just a little one, A BIG ONE). I will have to put forth the information that during college I was a French horn major for three years (before realizing I wanted to do medicine instead) and in order to be a decent horn player I had to develop a very good ear. If you do not know anything about professional orchestra playing, tuning is a big part of a professional muscians life. Anyway, so I have a very good ear (I am not trying to brag, but this is the truth). I can only conclude, that the reason I hear such a difference in my speakers now is that I am way too picky about pitch, color, etc.

 

[mtrycrafts]

First off let me state that I am not here to offend anyone.

LOL. If you offend someone, you would not be the first one and many are not easily offended.
Having other opinions, differing opinions should not be offensive.

I am not saying Monster cable is bad, because I know that it is decent; just not worth the money.

You are right. Not offensive here.


Now here comes the part where I might offend someone. The cable did make a difference in the sound (not just a little one, A BIG ONE).

How can this be offensive? Clean language, no attacks Oh, you have a different perception of the cables.


I will have to put forth the information that during college I was a French horn major for three years (before realizing I wanted to do medicine instead) and in order to be a decent horn player I had to develop a very good ear. If you do not know anything about professional orchestra playing, tuning is a big part of a professional muscians life. Anyway, so I have a very good ear (I am not trying to brag, but this is the truth). I can only conclude, that the reason I hear such a difference in my speakers now is that I am way too picky about pitch, color, etc.

No idea how good your ears are but now that you are into medicine, you can use some of that training to do some DBT protocol comparisons of cables. Sighted listening is unreliable, no matter how you slice it. No one is immune from bias.
To date, no one after 30 years of DBT comparison of comparable cables have been able to differentiate by sound alone. 16 ga and 12 ga is comparable. Greenhill published his experiment of 24ga, 16ga and 12ga. Results: don't use 24ga wire for speakers

Greenhill, Larry 'Speaker Cables: Can you Hear the Difference?' Stereo Review, Aug 83, pg 46-51.

 

[indcrimdefense]

mtrycrafts:

i respect your obviously greater technical expertise, and your opinions, all of which are well supported by studies, tests, etc. i can only report what i hear, or don't hear. as for the differences i heard between the audioquest & m850, it was only in the mid range & one sounded as if it was a bit broader and presented a slightly different soundstage. i would not say that one cable sounded better than the other, just different from one another.

one set of interconnects was hooked to the 2 channel audio out of a denon 2910, the other interconnect was hooked to the front outputs of the multichannel output, and both sets of interconnects were then connected to a B&K ref 5 stereo pre-amp, which allowed for switching from one to the other and back, on the same speakers/amplifier, etc. i also tried this with exactly the same type of interconnects, and could notice no difference whatsoever, so i don't attribute any differences heard to the 2910. i understand that it is not double blind nor particularly scientific, but it worked for my purposes. i didn't buy the audioquest, nor would i describe myself as a monster fan. i purchased monster before i knew better, and would describe them as a good cable just significantly overpriced & particularly overhyped. i post primarily to assist others who may not have the opportunity to demo as much equipment as i have at home, and to try to describe what i have heard as accurately as possible.

 

[toquemon]

¿Had somebody studied the following phenomenon: The abscence not the addition, for example, when i first purchased my DVD Player i used a "normal" toslink cable. After a while a bought a "better" toslink cable and i compared them. No difference at all but I left the "better" cable connected. After some 6 months I decided to use a dedicated CD Player for audio so I disconnected the "better" cable and connected the "normal" cable (just like it was at the beginning). I was very surprised to notice that de "normal" cable was a worst performer at high frequencies than the "better" cable. The curious thing is that at first I didn't notice any difference at all. For me It was easier to notice the "absence" not the "addition".

What do you guys think?

 

[Hi Ho]

I think it was purely a percieved difference. Digital signals are basically all or nothing. The optical cable cannot affect the signal unless it is so poorly built that it is losing data. If that was the case you would be having dropouts, not a different sound.