Top Ten Signs of Cable Vendor Snake Oil

What is Your Favorite "Snake Oil" Cable Scam?

  • Strand Jumping

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Diode Rectification

    Votes: 1 8.3%
  • Audiogenic Distortion

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Eddy Current Minimization

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Soakage

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Skin Effect

    Votes: 1 8.3%
  • Cable Elevators

    Votes: 2 16.7%
  • Break In

    Votes: 4 33.3%
  • Cryogenically Freezing

    Votes: 4 33.3%

  • Total voters
    12
Status
Not open for further replies.
gene

gene

Audioholics Master Chief
Administrator
<font color='#000000'>PaulF/DLorde;

Here is what I have prepared.  If you guys would like further credit, please let me know.  I think this is good content for posting and adding to our Cable Article Arsenal  


<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
Cable “Break In” Myth


Cable Vendor Claim
&quot;'Breaking in' a cable has everything to do with the insulation - not the wire itself. The insulation (or dielectric) will absorb energy from the conductor when a current is flowing (i.e. when music is playing). This energy-absorption causes the dielectric's molecules to re-arrange themselves from a random order into a uniform order. When the molecules have been rearranged, the dielectric will absorb less energy &amp; consequently cause less distortion.&quot; Audioquest

Audioholics Response:
Thus their conclusion is the dielectric, not the wire causes distortion!
Claims regarding insulation molecules &quot;aligning&quot; with a signal, skin effect, strand jumping, etc, are anecdotal at best. Let’s not forget that an audio signal is AC, and effectively random from a physical perspective. Nothing can align to a random signal by being anything other than random - exactly the state they claim is &quot;cured&quot; by injecting a signal.
 
“Break In” is not a proven audible or measurable phenomenon. The perception of changes in sound quality with time is likely attributable to the classical placebo effect, i.e., a listener anticipating a possible audible difference is predisposed to hear one whether or not it exists.


Audioholics Forum Feedback Response

“So is cable break in just a ploy for getting people to keep the cables beyond the return period, or perhaps long enough that their desire to do anything about the lack of any improvement is gone?”  Paul F


“I think there's more to it than that. There is a neural adjustment effect that occurs when a stimulus we are accustomed to changes, known as 'habituation'.

When you change to new cables, there may appear to be an audible difference. If this seems to be for the better, well and good - you'll keep the cables. If the cables seem marginally worse than the old ones, the 'break in improvement' claim will encourage you to persevere with them for a while. Over this time your auditory system will habituate to the new sound balance, resulting in a perceived improvement. If you then swap back to the old cables for a 'fair' comparison, they will probably sound worse, as you are now adjusted to the new ones.

The second effect that comes into play is our suggestibility. Some people are more suggestible than others, but most of us are surprisingly open to persuasion. Expensive audio cables are an almost ideal example: we are persuaded to get them because they will improve the sound, and will get better over time, they cost a lot of money so they ought to be 'special', we've gone to some to get them because we want a change for the better, we'd hate our choice to be a failure, it would be a hassle to return them and start again, and most importantly, the judgment is purely subjective and very susceptible to emotional influence.

Under these conditions, the chances are we'll convince ourselves the new cables sound better, even if on someone else's identical system they might sound slightly worse - after all, 'worse' is subjective, and they have to break in, right?

In reality, there probably won't be a significant audible difference, but our expectations and suggestibility will manufacture one.



There are probably quite a few old-hands who are resistant to these effects, you know, the cynics and pessimists but it doesn't matter to the snake-oil salesmen, there are enough suggestible people seeking auditory nirvana for them to prosper, get rich, afford swanky web sites, buy advertising space in all the glossy mags, and still give a decent mark-up to the retail outlets. “ DLorde

Interestingly, the New Scientists recently commented on the London Heathrow Hi Fi Show, saying that among the cables selling for up to £30,000 for 6 metres, they found Quad demonstrating their latest speakers to great enthusiasm. The orange cable to the speakers looked oddly familiar. When asked about it, Tony Faulkner, the recording engineer demonstrating them (who'd used the speakers as monitors while recording Saint-Saen's complete works for piano &amp; orchestra, Gramophone's Record of the Year), said of the cables:

&quot;Yes, they would look familiar if you have a garden. Before the show opened we went over the road to the DIY superstore and bought one of those £20 extension leads that Black &amp; Decker sells for electric hedge-cutters. They are made from good, thick copper wire, look nice and sound good to me. The show's been running for three days and no one in the audience has noticed...&quot;
</td></tr></table></font>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
P

PaulF

Audioholic
<font color='#000000'>Dlorde,

Funny you should mention habituation, I've never heard it expressed that way before. That was in sense what I was referring to also.

Years ago, I had a hobby of repairing TVs. I would swap stories of the difficult find etc. with other techs. One tech, an instructor of mine in college, told me about an elderly couple who's TV had broken. He went out to repair the TV, got it fixed, and in so doing noticed that the picture had a slight yellow tint to it. Naturally, he corrected the picture for proper grey scale.

A few days later he got a call from the customer saying the TV was not right, could he come back to take a look. The TV was in perfect working order, but as you may have guessed, they thought the picture looked a little blue. They were so used to the yellow tint, the tech had to reintroduce the yellow tint to keep the customer happy.

This is common with picture sharpness as well. Years ago, before the introduction of auto-focus circuits, it was common for the resistors in the focus circuit to go slightly higher in value due to the high voltage (3-5KV). This happened gradually and would defocus the picture over time. Many times after a fault, techs would adjust the focus to correct this. Again, you would find that people thought the picture had become worse, grainy etc.

I believe the same is true with our ears. Given enough time we will adapt to slight changes in acoustics until the change becomes the norm.

Gene,

Feel free to use any of my comments. The way you presented the draft seems fair. I have started a paper on video resolution and it has ballooned out to more than 14 pages and I'm not close to being done. So I loath to take on another one for the moment.</font>
 
D

dlorde

Audioholic Intern
gene : <font color='#000000'>PaulF/DLorde;

Here is what I have prepared. If you guys would like further credit, please let me know. I think this is good content for posting and adding to our Cable Article Arsenal
</font>
<font color='#000000'>Looks fine to me Gene - by the way, the Quad story should be attributed to New Scientist Magazine - I had finger trouble
</font>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
D

dlorde

Audioholic Intern
PaulF : I believe the same is true with our ears. Given enough time we will adapt to slight changes in acoustics until the change becomes the norm.
Yes, habituation occurs in practically all neural circuitry, in fact it's a fundamental behaviour most living things - adjusting to the environment.

I guess it's the next door neighbors who notice its effects most, as we habituate to high volume and bass


We tend not to notice it most of the time, until something changes suddenly - such as when next door cuts the power
</font>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
D

Dan Banquer

Full Audioholic
<font color='#000000'>Let's hear it for Tony Faulkner!!!! I use Belden 8718 myself.</font>
 
G

Guest

Guest
<font color='#000000'>Hmmm. Went to log in, and the system said &quot;Sorry, we could not find a member called Steve Eddy, are you sure it's correct?&quot;

I thought I'd registered here before but perhaps not. So I go to try and register under Steve Eddy. The system says &quot;We already have a member by that name, please choose another.&quot;

So, let's see what happens if I try to post.

se</font>
 
Steve Eddy

Steve Eddy

Audioholic Intern
<font color='#000000'><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Steve - email me at clint@audioholics.com

I'll set you up with a temp password that you can then change.
</td></tr></table>

Thanks, Clint. The account seems to work at least as far as logging in is concerned.

Unfortunately after I'd logged in with the new account I had to leave to get some work out of the way and I done forgot what I was going to say.

se</font>
 
Steve Eddy

Steve Eddy

Audioholic Intern
<font color='#000000'>Oh yeah, I remember now.


Mr. Harley says:

We've been very forthright in the past about responding to your questions. There is a very complete explanation of what our Dielectric Bias System is, how it works and why it is sonically beneficial included in all of our recent ads in Stereophile, Absolute Sound and several other audio enthusiast publications.

Looking at their ad on p. 71 of the October 2003 issue of Stereophile, one thing that rather jumps out is:

&quot;Break-in properly applies to mechanical phenomena, such as a motor or a loudspeaker surround. Cables and capacitors do not break-in, rather their &quot;dielectric forms,&quot; meaning that it takes time for the dielectric material to adapt to a charged state.&quot;

Actually dielectric forming properly applies to electrolytic capacitors where the dielectric is formed on the aluminum foil electrode. The actual dielectric of an aluminum electrolytic capacitor is a thin layer of aluminum oxide which is formed by applying a DC voltage across the capacitor. In other words, anodizing.

From United Chemi-Con's website:

Formation

The dielectric of the aluminum electrolytic capacitor is composed of a thin layer of aluminum oxide (Al2O3) which develops or &quot;forms&quot; on the surface of the etched aluminum foil during a process called &quot;formation.&quot;

This process of forming the dielectric oxide on the aluminum foil (electrode) requires a continuous application of DC voltage at 140% to 200% of the rated voltage for the capacitor being manufactured. The dielectric thickness of this aluminum oxide film is approximately 15Å/volt. The insulation strength is approximately 107V/cm.


Of course cables are a whole different ballgame from aluminum electrolytic capacitors where the dielectric is already formed. So I'm wondering if this dielectric forming mentioned in their ad isn't based on some misunderstanding thinking that dielectric forming is something which applies to all dielectrics.

Moving on:

The exceptionally simple design puts a wire down the middle of the cable which is simply an extension of the battery's anode. This wire is attached to positive (+) at the DBS battery pack, and not to anything else. It is not in the signal path and has no interaction with the signal.

Hmmm. I'd always thought the battery's negative terminal was the anode.

No matter. The claim of interest is that it's not in the signal path and has no interaction with the signal.

Um, isn't the negative terminal of the battery also connected to another conductor and the signal conductors are situated between those two conductors? How else can it polarize the dielectric? And if that's the case, then the signal conductors are operating within that field and will indeed interact with it.

In fact, unless I'm overlooking something, the signal is essentially capacitively coupled to the battery!

Further:

The negative side of a battery is nothing; it's just an empty reservoir.

Hmmm. When the negative side of your battery becomes an empty reservoir, it's dead, isn't it? Otherwise, it had better have an abundance of negative charge. And the postive side an abundance of positive charge. How else do they expect to produce that &quot;comparatively high voltage DC field&quot;?

Still more:

Again, there is no interaction with the signal flow and no extra connections are introduced to the signal path.

Of course there is. Just because it's an AC coupled connection doesn't make it any less a connection.

And finally:

There is no new language to this phenomenon. It is simply more of the same.

I dunno, &quot;dielectric forming&quot; certainly seems to be some new language. And I think that last sentence is incomplete and could use one more word between &quot;same&quot; and the period. However I'll leave that word up to y'all's imagination.


And to be fair, I'd like to say a few words about Gene's comment:

Here is an example of the dielectric biasing scheme courtesy of Audioquest.  The battery does not make a complete electrical connection.  Thus it is considered an open circuit.

The scheme would in fact polarize the dielectric as claimed, particularly if they're using a pair of braided shields in order to fully enclose the signal conductors. Just imagine the signal conductors being run between the two plates of a capacitor with 24 volts across it.

Whether it's of any benefit is open to argument. AudioQuest is keen to tell you what their &quot;cure&quot; is, but they never really identify what the &quot;disease&quot; is and resort to framing it in vague and arguably misleading terminology.

se</font>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
gene

gene

Audioholics Master Chief
Administrator
<font color='#000000'>HI Steve;

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Hmmm. I'd always thought the battery's negative terminal was the anode.</td></tr></table>

Maybe they are confusing the battery with a Diode where Cathode is negative and Anode is positive? &nbsp;They do think stranded wires exhibit diode rectification.

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The scheme would in fact polarize the dielectric as claimed, particularly if they're using a pair of braided shields in order to fully enclose the signal conductors. Just imagine the signal conductors being run between the two plates of a capacitor with 24 volts across it.</td></tr></table>

I have not seen that ad at Stereophile that you referred to in your post. &nbsp;The only info I had on this product was their reference to the pick on their website. &nbsp;I didn't see any shielding in the wires. &nbsp;I wonder how high the capacitance is on this cable system? &nbsp;I see no Zobel here either. &nbsp;Hmm..</font>
 
Steve Eddy

Steve Eddy

Audioholic Intern
<font color='#000000'><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Maybe they are confusing the battery with a Diode where Cathode is negative and Anode is positive?</td></tr></table>

Perhaps. Their &quot;Cable Theory&quot; tome has a fair bit of confusion in it as well so I guess this wouldn't be too surprising.

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">They do think stranded wires exhibit diode rectification.</td></tr></table>

Yes. Something which I see no mechanism for. They seem to base this speculation the existence of copper oxide diodes, but they seem to assume that copper/copper oxide produces a diode, however in a strand of wires, you'd have copper/copper oxide/copper, which won't work as a diode. You need copper/copper oxide and then some conductor other than copper. Actual copper oxide diodes typically use a sandwich of copper/copper oxide/lead.

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I have not seen that ad at Stereophile that you referred to in your post.  The only info I had on this product was their reference to the pick on their website.  I didn't see any shielding in the wires.</td></tr></table>

Hard to tell from the illustration. Not sure of the wires shown are the only wires that are involved with the battery or if they're bleeder wires which are ultimately attached to a braided shield.

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I wonder how high the capacitance is on this cable system?</td></tr></table>

Dunno. Perhaps not much more capacitive than otherwise. Far as I can see, the conductor pairs are still adjacent to each other and that will largely define the capacitance.

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I see no Zobel here either.  Hmm..</td></tr></table>

Why would you expect to see a Zobel?

se</font>
 
gene

gene

Audioholics Master Chief
Administrator
<font color='#000000'>Hi Steve;

Reasons for comment on Zobel:
1) I was being facetious

2) Their employeed cable geometry does give rise to higher than zip cord capacitance. If they added a foil shield around the cable, that would raise it further. &nbsp;Not sure of their capacitance/ft, but if it is say greater than 100pf/ft their cables may benefit from a zobel termination to eliminate potential for RF ingress when loaded by a speaker with high Z at high frequencies and hooked to a wide bandwidth amplifier no?

BTW; I did an article about calculating cable inductance you may find of interest, which I could expand upon for capacitance and cover other cable geometries if I only had the time. &nbsp;Any volunteers ;)

Calculating Cable Inductance</font>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Steve Eddy

Steve Eddy

Audioholic Intern
<font color='#000000'><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Reasons for comment on Zobel:
1) I was being facetious
</td></tr></table>

Ah. Bad timing. My Faceti-O-Meter is in the shop at the moment. They sure don't build things like they used to.


<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">2) Their employeed cable geometry does give rise to higher than zip cord capacitance. If they added a foil shield around the cable, that would raise it further.  Not sure of their capacitance/ft, but if it is say greater than 100pf/ft their cables may benefit from a zobel termination to eliminate potential for RF ingress when loaded by a speaker with high Z at high frequencies and hooked to a wide bandwidth amplifier no?</td></tr></table>

Yeah, I guess some of the squirrelier amps might have fits with such a load. But I see that as a problem for the amp manufacturer to deal with.


<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">BTW; I did an article about calculating cable inductance you may find of interest, which I could expand upon for capacitance and cover other cable geometries if I only had the time.  Any volunteers ;)</td></tr></table>

Sure, I'll volunteer.

Hey all you cheap lazy bastards, go buy a damned capacitance meter and measure it yourself!

How's that?


se</font>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
gene

gene

Audioholics Master Chief
Administrator
<font color='#000000'>Steve;

Well I do have access to a Wayne Kerr Magnetics analyzer, but what good is it without the cable sample to test  


Calculating cable capacitance can get a bit tricky, especially when dealing with different cable geometries than conventional twin feeder Zip Cord.  

My objective one day is to continue my prior article with simple equations and relationships that will apply so that measurements can correlate with theory.

Call me a nerd, but when I do any design, I like to correlate:
1) PSPICE
2) Analytical Analysis
3) MathCad Analysis
4) Measurements
before I sign and seal off a design.  I take this approach with audio cables, no matter how trivial it may seem at times, I really like correlation  


As for amps, stability, unity gain crossing, phase margin, and how this all interplays with the reactance of a cable + speaker load, this is something I am working on with Speaker Cable Face Off II and would value your input given your infinitely more experience in audio amplifier design than myself.

[edited grammar, so sleepy]</font>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Steve Eddy

Steve Eddy

Audioholic Intern
<font color='#000000'><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Well I do have access to a Wayne Kerr Magnetics analyzer, but what good is it without the cable sample to test  
</td></tr></table>

Dude, be creative! Kiss some babies. Shake some hands. Grease some palms. Ply them with cheap booze and hookers. Schmoze, Gene, schmooze!


<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Calculating cable capacitance can get a bit tricky, especially when dealing with different cable geometries than conventional twin feeder Zip Cord.</td></tr></table>

Yes. And the most common calculation for twin feeder assumes that all space that's not occupied by conductor is occupied by dielectric so it doesn't work right for things such as twisted pair.

Which is why I think it'd be best to simply obtain some cables employing some basic geometries and measure them.

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">My objective one day is to continue my prior article with simple equations and relationships that will apply so that measurements can correlate with theory.</td></tr></table>

The basic theories are pretty straightforward. It's the numerous geometries that complicate things.

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Call me a nerd, but when I do any design, I like to correlate:
1) PSPICE
2) Analytical Analysis
3) MathCad Analysis
4) Measurements
before I sign and seal off a design.  I take this approach with audio cables, no matter how trivial it may seem at times, I really like correlation  
</td></tr></table>

dang! And I thought audiophiles were obsessive/compulsive.


<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">As for amps, stability, unity gain crossing, phase margin, and how this all interplays with the reactance of a cable + speaker load, this is something I am working on with Speaker Cable Face Off II and would value your input given your infinitely more experience in audio amplifier design than myself.</td></tr></table>

Yikes. Where'd you get that idea? I'm just a noodler at best. I&quot;d be happy to offer what input I can, but don't overestimate me.


se</font>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
G

Guest

Guest
<font color='#000000'>I think you people all have a chip on your shoulder! I'm a professional musician and sound engineer, who's also been an audiophile for many years. I've heard the effects of cable break in many, many times. It's not fiction. Most recently, a friend bought a spidf digital cable for the output of his CD player. He called me up and said &quot;This sounds TERRIBLE, very thin and harsh&quot;. I stopped by to listen to the cable and my first question was &quot;Did you break it in?&quot;. &quot;Why?&quot;, he said. I gave him a copy of the Stereophile Magazine test CD with a burn-in track. He played it constantly for a couple of days. Then, we listened to the system. The difference was not subtle, it was night and day. Now, we had a full, deep soundstage, with great resolution and coherency. Now, &nbsp;he was happy.
&nbsp;I've experienced this over and over again. It's also true with components and speakers. And as for high end cable voodoo, sure, there's some of that going around, but putting together a first class high end audio system is an art. Components need to work synergisticly with one another. This includes cable. I've tremendously improved the performance of my Mark Levinson/B&amp;W/Rel system by finding the best matching cable, currently MIT reference level cables. These cables have produced the most natural tonal balance, clearest resolution, best dynamics and deepest, most well defined sound stage that I've heard in my system. I've spent many a day in recording studios. I know first hand what live music sounds like, up close. I know what a violin or acoustic guitar,etc. sounds like in person. Through much trial and error, and with much appreciated help from other audio professionals, including my high end audio dealer, I've fine tuned my system to be accurate as possible. A large part of this fine tuning involved matching the proper cables to my system.
&nbsp; &nbsp; I don't care about measurements. I care about sound! When I hear a violin through my speakers, I want it to sound like a violin, and with my &quot;high end&quot; MIT cables, IT DOES!! Use your ears, people.</font>
 
N

NOFAITH

Audiophyte
<font color='#000000'>So do you work for MIT in marketing or human resources?</font>
 
G

Guest

Guest
<font color='#000000'>No, I don't work for MIT. Do you want me to talk about the TARA Labs cables that I have in my acoustic guitar rig? They've improved the sound of my rig considerably over the cables that I used to use, which were standard oxygen-free copper strands. Not only the sound improved, but the touch of the instrument improved. The rig became more sensitive to slight changes in my playing dynamics. On one of the first gigs that I played with the new cables, my soundman came over to me after the show and asked me what I'd changed in my acoustic guitar setup. I played dumb and said, &quot;I don't know, what did you hear?&quot;. He told me the guitar came through richer and more natural sounding. When I told him about the TARA Labs cables, he couldn't believe it. The $1800 for the cables was very well spent, in my opinion.
&nbsp; &nbsp;I could go on for days about all the positive experiences that I've had with high end cables. Another point is that, in many lines of &nbsp;cable, such as MIT or TARA Labs, there is a significant improvement as you move up the line in price. It is a law of diminishing returns after awhile, but the main criteria seem to be- are your components &quot;resolving enough&quot; to hear the differences, and are you willing to pay the cost. Is it worth it to you? For example, you could take a JVC or comparable brand receiver and put, say $200 MIT speaker cables on it and hear an improvement in the sound over stock cables. But, if you switched to $14,000 MIT top of the line reference cables, you probalby would not hear much of a difference. But, you do the same thing using a Mark Levinson or Krell reference system($100,000+), you'll hear a big improvement with the expensive cables. I've spent many hours auditioning cables and hearing these improvements for myself.
&nbsp; &nbsp;Again, people, use your ears!!!! Not everything can be measured. Just because it can't be measured, does it mean it doesn't exist? As a guitar player, I can plug into a '64 Fender Twin Reverb tube amp and realize instantly that I'm playing and hearing something very special, something that many other amps can't compare to. Can I measure it? How do I prove it? I can't. As a player or a listener, I just have to use my ears. How can you prove that a real Strativarius is one of the best violins ever created? Again, you can't........you just have to open up your ears (and minds) and listen! Listen and you will hear.</font>
 
D

Dan Banquer

Full Audioholic
<font color='#000000'>O.K. Greenroom; I have had the opposite experience with high end cables and that includes putting them on some of the priciest equipment that you mentioned. The higher in price they get the worse they sound.
Anytime you would like to stop hiding behind that moniker of yours and tell us who you really is O.K. with me. Otherwise I will assume you are just another shill for the snake oil wire companies.
            Dan Banquer
            R.E. Designs</font>
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top