Cable Happy.

Nobody is disputing LCR characteristics affect component interface in an extremely small subset of circumstances (mainly cartridges, passive pre-amps and some speakers) and to a largely very small degree. In most circumstances varying LCR within wide ranges will have no audible or even measurable effect. However this has nothing to do with cable claims being made on this forum where people claim something entirely different. You can get cables with any set of LCR characteristics you like for a few pounds a meter. However cable proponent s claim that if you take a cable costing thousands it can sound better than one costing pence - even if the LCR is matched to be the same. This is clearly nonsense and has never withstood any scientific scrutiny.

The same goes for shielding. Use an unshielded cable from your cartridge and you are sure to get hum! With shielded cable the hum will vanish - so there is an audible effect here but it is accordance with well understood engineering principles and is accordance with known science. Suggestion is important in all auditioning however for cables that is all there is.

There are two completely separate issues here. One for which there is evidence and theory and has nothing to do with the contentious aspects under discussion - and the one under discussion for which there is no evidence whatsoever. There is there is no incomplete understanding of the cable issue - as there are currently no rigorous observations that support the claims of the pro cable argument. When evidence emerges to support the pro cable claims then theory will need to be addressed. Our understanding at this time appears to be complete with no contradictory observations of any kind. Its obvious that the distinction between these two areas is not clear in your mind and has given rise to this confusion.

 

I have a theory that all this cable malarkey came about because most supplied cables were poorly made/designed and easy to improve upon-an entire snakeoil industry was born out of it.

 

prove it. produce some evidence that withstands scientific scrutiny.

Currently they are exclusive. One has evidence the other does not - that is the basis of exclusion in scientific method. until you produce testable repeatable evidence. Thats all you have to do but no-one has ever done it. hence all the silly fairy stories about QM, faith etc to avoid the fact the cable claims have currently failed.

There may be something to that point - poor quality construction especially soldering, or poor quality connections and earthing etc can make a difference but I suspect even the cheap patch cords included with kit would not suffer from this.

 

Does that answer your question Rollo?

 

You seem to be misunderstanding me now-see I don't have to prove f*** all, you are the one making all the claims not me-you cannot make the assertions about peoples combinations of equipment-no data see-you don't have the info sorry-so no sweeping statements-for a scientist you are overly fond of them.
I have merely acknowledged the point that SM made about dealer pressure and from real experience recognised this as common to all in store auditioning-the moot point being whether something is sounding 'better' and who stands to gain if you get convinced that it actually does.

 

vaguely amusing to see how a thread called 'Cable Happy' can be so long and yet get so twisted and make folk so grumpy

 

Yes you do scientifically speaking if not personally. The onus of proof is on the person making the claim for new science or experimental observations - like it or not.

The dealer stands to gain as they make most of their profit on selling cables to go with the system.

 

No they don't. There have been no statistically significant ABX tests for differences in cables. Even if you want to entertain that there are measurable differences (which there are subtle ones) they can not make ANY difference to the sound. ABX testing is very strict on this.. Please don't waver

 

The exception to this is Petes cables..

I am quite happy to say his cables made an improvement to my system......and recommend others might like to try.

Isn't that (at least in part) what a forum is for.........to recommend services or products that have worked for you......and might for others??

 

Pete's a nice guy who's helped a lot of people.

He gets too much stick really, in comparison to all of the other cable manufacturers.

He's absolutely not in any way an exception to anything however.

 

the simple fact is that that nearly all cables differ in LCR and shielding construction, so they all sound different.

and if you doubt that, you can come round to my house, measure my tonearm din to phono stage wire, we can listen to it, i can then zip off the copper shield, that has no effect on LCR whatsoever as it is so far from the signal wires and then while you listen to radio sheffield and radio 4 simultaneously via my rega P5 you can tell me theres no fucking difference.

what a crock .

 

well, the difference sonically will depend on the extent of LCR difference, and of course poor construction (e.g. poor soldering, bad shielding etc).

I disagree very strongly that ''they all sound different'', because, well because they don't!

Some sound different to each other.

This doesn't bring a wish to spend a lot of cash from me personally... it makes me ask instead...

1) Why buy something of poor construction?
2) When appropriate LCR levels are known, why buy something that deviates from that, just because it sounds different (I buy no nonsense studio stuff for that reason).

This is the controversial statement - if you have 10 cables and one sounds really different from the rest, you are likely to have a bad apple in the bunch, not 'system matching' or whatever.

 

Well, like, duh.

If you concur that cables with equivalent bulk electrical parameters and adequate shielding for their purpose sound the same then why are you muddying the waters?

The debate is whether cables that measure the same sound the same. For instance Zanash changes the conductor material from copper to silver (or whatever) and claims the sound changes as a property of the material.

Is there a believer in the southern part of the country who would like to explore the matter?

Paul

 

Hey Rollo,
Wise words IMO.

I notice you are across the pond and yet correctly use the word 'arse' with all its rich anglo-saxon resonance-top man
F

 

I couldn't put forward the argument remotely as eloquently so I didn't bother.

 

BN, I guess what I meant was that Pete doesn't involve himself in heavy advertising, or to my knowledge, hard sell. He relize on word of mouth for his sales.

I thnk that was how I meant my comment.

When I fist started posting here a few years ago I asked generally about cables as I wanted to have an experiment; some body put me in touch with "Zanash" as a recomendation of soemone who produces cables which are good at their price point.

I haven' t got a problem with that.


edit

I don't think hes making any claims for "new science".

+I'm happy with his personal observations........ its taken my kit a hell of a long way.

No ifs or buts about it.

 

No they don't in general. Produce some evidence.

As has already been stated a cartridge is a passive device like a passive preamp and therefore capacitance is of important when driving a phono stage input. This is well understood and backed up by science. I have no problem with this fact and indeed noted it myself before anyone else mentioned it. Low cap cable can be bought for a few pounds a meter and there is no benefit other than going to this level. Likewise shielding is of benefit for low level signals and is likewise well understood and backed up by theory. The claims of cable fanatics go way beyond this and are not supported by evidence or theory. They claim identically shielded cables with identical LCR can differ in performance to such an instance that an expense of hundreds or in some cases tens of thousands of pounds per cable can be justified in terms of improvement in system performance over cable thats costs a few pounds. This is the only crock. Do you really think if it was as you say then it wouldn't have already been proved by now?

 

Yes he is and you are (if you don't mind me saying so) beginning to sound as if you are on commission!

Why not put your convictions to the test. Two of his cables, electrically matched, controlled enviroment. Neutral observers. Results posted on the forum.

Of course it's statistically insignificant but you may well do better than the Russ Andrews guy.