acoustic zen or chord indigo?

Ooh Chris,

now you've gone and done it....

 

As in with digital cable?

What I was wondering, was, would Van Damme 2.0mm sound the same as Atlas Hyper 2.0 ?

 

But does it have to be gold lettering? I also thought it sounded more impressive if the cable was wrapped in woven mesh with bold lettering on heatshrink?

 

Errrrrrrm . . . . no, not even close, not even a good stab at it.

By changing the LCR characterists of the cable itself without any additional filtering like Zobel networks, then very little change can be heard at human audible frequencies This is a summation formulated by someone who has very little direct contact with a variety of cables and their sonic characteristics, the very reason why the fiery debates start.

Metallurgy also plays a significant role too in the final sound produced.

 

Here we go even got moderators in on the arguments.

 

You know you are going to be asked to back that lot up in the current climate don't you?

Let's start with Metallurgy. Have you got any acceptable research that shows that the actual metal used in a simple cable makes any audible difference at all?

 

Funnily enough, gold is the colour most found on companies' top graded cables. Nothing to do with subliminal marketing you realise

 

The question is a can of worms. It obviously cannot be answered without someone either posting the scientific position or someone else posting a reply that is totally irrelevent to the question posting member.

What the moberators were trying to do was to post a caveat - noting that any following replies would be higghly questionable from the normal scientific position.

If the believers can't even accept that without getting all flustered, I see little possibility of any of these threads not descendingg into chaos.

 

Hifinut....

Look, this really is very simple.

The chord looks better and is I believe the cheaper of the two so it represents the better buy for the style conscious or skinflints.

The Zen costs more and being silver will allow you to boast at cable wank fests and further impress the impressionable.

Well, I think that sums up the argument. Who's got the padlock ?

 

Agreed. Mods. Can you lock this before it turns into another waste of bandwidth?

I appreciate your attempts to avoid this but some people don't seem to want any moderation.

Rob's post provides the perfect answer.

 

before..?

 

Given certain people are getting very cosy with the mods, some get banned while others don't, I would like assurances from the mods that private messages will remain private.
No smart ass answers please this is a very serious point.

 

Cooky.

Certain people are abiding by the AUP and certain ones aren't.

That's fairly simple no?

 

"The question is a can of worms. It obviously cannot be answered without someone either posting the scientific position or someone else posting a reply that is totally irrelevent to the question posting member."

and taken from the TVC thread

"I borrowed the standard MF Audio copper unit and to be honest preferred the Alps pot in my amplifier. Although the TVC "sounded" more transparent, the Alps was actually giving me more musical information."

the question is Mic are you for real?

phil

 

If you're not a mod why are you answering my post?

 

Phil,

I am relaying an impression I got in my system context. That's fairly obvious. Let's look at it this way. Ken Kessler is still happy to review preamplifiers, fairly confident that differences highlighted in his reference system will translate to others. He is not prepared to review cables as, if differences do exist, they are totally dependent on the products being used in the system and therefore he considers his reviewing them pointless.

 

Is there a law that prevents me doing so when you imply something?

 

Sorry but you keep quoting Ken Kessler, do you honestly think that the majority of people give a toss about his views?. I suppose because he dislikes the 300b valve, that means that all 300b valves are rubbish as well?

phil

 

A very serious point.

 

Phil,

you clearly don't give a toss about Ken's views, my views, the scientific community's views or possibly any others that are at odds with your own.

I use Ken as he is a music lover not a scientist. Would you prefer I make my point with science?