Cable Happy.

[Stereo Mic]

It's a demo I've done several times now and expensive, well regarded cables can never be identified from the source feed. Unfortunately for the 'believers' you get identical results from a cheap patch cord.

Then I propose a more suitable test FFS

 

[RobHolt]

Then I propose a more suitable test FFS

There is a serious point there, because those peddling the myth that is cable sound will always find something to claim the test was null and void. The test system will not be sufficiently revealing , the room acoustics are masking the effect, the colour spectrum from the light bulbs dulled the listeners perception etc......

Mike, you know what these people are like.

 

[rollo]

Based on the Audioholics example above we can approximate the resistance of the copper cable over 1.5 metres as 0.032ohms.

The Silver one over the same 1.5 metre 0.0336 ohms.

Anyone really think they'll be able to hear a difference? Honestly?

Its not just the conductor its the entire assembly that counts. Dielectric, wire, shielding, connectors,solder or crimp,etc. I agree that no one could tell a difference in that comparison only. Its the entire assembly that counts IMO.
We have conducted too many blind tests at our club meetings. The results proved that cables sound different. Actually the only guys who didn't hear a difference [ 2 out of 15 ] were the frugal type. Go figure.

rollo

 

[RobHolt]

I figure

Actually the only guys who didn't hear a difference [ 2 out of 15 ] were the frugal type. Go figure.

rollo

You mean those less frugal types with money to burn like to pose with their expensive wanky wires?

Some kind of audiophool status symbol?

 

[DavidF]

There is a serious point there, because those peddling the myth that is cable sound will always find something to claim the test was null and void. The test system will not be sufficiently revealing , the room acoustics are masking the effect, the colour spectrum from the light bulbs dulled the listeners perception etc......

Mike, you know what these people are like.

Another provoctive, pompous and and frankly slightly insulting statement from the can't hear, won't here brigade.

Not a great inducement to prove anything to anybody....where the number of observations of differences surely precludes the need for further proof anyway?

(Just read back through this thread.....the recent pole.)

Just a thought!







.

 

[sq225917]

so we come down to it then.

the anti cable posse believe that transmission of electrical signals is nothing more than LCR.

Really?

Does no shielding paradigm exist in cables that doesn't effect LCR? if so my tonearm wire must be an impossible construction then, as it's been measured down to to 3 decimal places for LCR and shows no difference with shield attached or not. maybe these tiny differences you claim can't be heard, actually can. As by extrapolation, if no other measurements count, they must be responsible for the cables immunity to radio when the shield is in place.

if differences in sound does not comes from the 'static' parameters of LCR, then it must live elsewhere in the murky world of electron theory.

maybe we just aren't measuring the right values for cables and maybe signal integrity itself needs to be convolved into the equation.

 

[Stereo Mic]

We have conducted too many blind tests at our club meetings. The results proved that cables sound different. Actually the only guys who didn't hear a difference [ 2 out of 15 ] were the frugal type. Go figure.

rollo

Then post the results around the world. You will have a world first. Congratulations. You are the only group of people ever to successfully identify identical cables under controlled conditions. I'm amazed this has remained a secret.

 

[Stereo Mic]

maybe we just aren't measuring the right values for cables and maybe signal integrity itself needs to be convolved into the equation.

I guess people will start looking for something to measure once someone proves there's something worth measuring by actually identifying differences under controlled conditions.

Until that time, we really are in the realms of "most haunted"

 

[RobHolt]

Another provoctive, pompous and and frankly slightly insulting statement from the can't hear, won't here brigade.

David, if folk post crap which flies in the face of the facts they can expect a provocative and, to use your words, frankly slightly insulting reply.
Since when did comments containing repeated stupidity and inaccuracy deserve anything else?

Just how may times is it necessary to point out the blindingly obvious to people before it sinks in?

 

[rollo]

You mean those less frugal types with money to burn like to pose with their expensive wanky wires?

Some kind of audiophool status symbol?

No, C'mon man, now theres a problem with well to do people. I think you made my point. Thats a bit extreme I think. Unfortunately most of the cable Manf's just charge too much. They seem to feel that cables should cost approx. 10% of total system cost. Thats BS IMO. Cables if priced right would end this entire debate. The only reason I own some exotic cables is I was able to obtain them for free or at cost. I refuse to purchase the expensive ones no matter how my kit is improved. Its the principle of the matter for me.
Yeah I'm sure there are some people who show off their cables and gear for their ego. We can say that for any hobby, but its not the norm.

rollo

 

[RobHolt]

Thats BS IMO. Cables if priced right would end this entire debate. The only reason I own some exotic cables is I was able to obtain them for free or at cost. I refuse to purchase the expensive ones no matter how my kit is improved. Its the principle of the matter for me.

But surely many cables are priced correctly and therefore the whole cable sound thing should be a non-starter?
What's wrong with Tandy patch cords or some RS mic cable at $1pm?

What exactly is wrong with inexpensive RS, Van Dam or Klotz microphone cable that causes it to change the signal passing through it in any way that is audible?

 

[sq225917]

here's another line for you.

what if you guys are right an all 'cables' do sound the same given vaguely similar LCR.

and what 'we' are hearing is simply, the equipment at the end of each cables susceptability to RF transmitted/injected into the system via that cable?

i'd buy that, different geometries etc pcik up differeing amounts and frequencies of RF, the RF doesn't interact with the signal in the cable, but potentially modulates it within the working components of the source, amp or speakers.

i'd buy that.

is there any way we can take a 'spectral snapshot' of each cables susceptability, and then maybe force this snapshot into the system at some suitable point to see if it has the measured/percieved effect as swapping cables.

maybe the balanced cable paradigm, hints as this being a potential cause, after all we all agree balanced cables, done right, sound better, don't we? so maybe the differences are down to RF and EMF susceptability and ability to transmit signal at these higher frequencies.

things like skin effect would play a greater part in a cables make up if this was true. and then we could lay the blame at the door of cable manufacturers who already know this to be the case but are keeping schtum and selling wank-wire based on fake science, when in reality they know exactly what gives, but just don't want to drive everyone to all balnced set ups.

i'd buy that, so to speak.

i certainly don't think looking at the cable in isolation is sufficient, it's like looking at the octane rating of petrol in a car and saying increased octane makes no difference, when in reality the bottleneck is not the octane rating but potentially the air/fuel mix.

 

[anon_bb]

An excellent idea.

if they sound no different then you also eliminate any other factor besides the cable as well - therefore the difference heard is an upper bound on what the cable might contribute.

If that upper bound is nothing then all objection is silenced

Another option is to use a pre amp with a passive tape loop.
Just insert the test cable into the loop and you can compare instantly with the direct feed at the flick of a switch.

It's a demo I've done several times now and expensive, well regarded cables can never be identified from the source feed. Unfortunately for the 'believers' you get identical results from a cheap patch cord.

 

[anon_bb]

The difference comes from the capacitance. I have used varying lengths of identical cable to exactly this effect. The change correlates almost exactly with comparative capacitance of other different types of cable. Of course shielding is useful - it blocks interference so much is obvious as valuable for small signals. This is nothing to do with cable manufacturers claims.

so we come down to it then.

the anti cable posse believe that transmission of electrical signals is nothing more than LCR.

Really?

Does no shielding paradigm exist in cables that doesn't effect LCR? if so my tonearm wire must be an impossible construction then, as it's been measured down to to 3 decimal places for LCR and shows no difference with shield attached or not. maybe these tiny differences you claim can't be heard, actually can. As by extrapolation, if no other measurements count, they must be responsible for the cables immunity to radio when the shield is in place.

if differences in sound does not comes from the 'static' parameters of LCR, then it must live elsewhere in the murky world of electron theory.

maybe we just aren't measuring the right values for cables and maybe signal integrity itself needs to be convolved into the equation.

 

[Paul Ranson]

As by extrapolation, if no other measurements count, they must be responsible for the cables immunity to radio when the shield is in place.

This is getting very silly. The claim from the cable advocates is nothing to do with shielding. Zanash makes cables that have no shield.

maybe the balanced cable paradigm, hints as this being a potential cause

Balancing really doesn't do much for RF interference. It's more to do with earthing and minimising crosstalk.

To get down to basics. Would you expect cables that differ only in their conductor material to sound different?

Paul

 

[cooky1257]

This is getting very silly.


Balancing really doesn't do much for RF interference.



Paul

Hello? ?olleH

 

[Paul Ranson]

It's because the symmetry of a balanced input degrades at RF, the RF is only a problem because of the non-linearities demodulating it, which aren't similar on the hot and cold inputs.

Good screening on the other hand.... But that's a simple matter of choosing from the RS catalogue and involves no elves in sub-terranean workshops at all.

Paul

 

[sq225917]

the whole point of balanced cables is that all the wires pickup the same crap so it can be subtracted from the signal...

paul in answer to your question. i wouldn't 'expect' anything, but if they did i wouldn't deny what i heard.

 

[Paul Ranson]

To the former, it's tricky electronics, take my word for it. Otherwise you could do worse than read http://www.dself.dsl.pipex.com/ampins/balanced/balanced.htm

To the latter, it appears that you are in the 'cables sound the same' camp and just stirring things up...

Paul

 

[sq225917]

i'm definately not in the cables sound the same camp, i just don't 'expect' them to sound different, just because they appear different or are advertised as such.

the silver and copper cables i have used and owned sounded different to me, but i have no way of knowing why, maybe conductor, maybe pixie dust.