Originally posted by 7_V
That's an interesting one.
The large manufacturers are interested in bringing out flashy-looking products, positioned at the correct price points in the best market niches, launched using the right reviewers and sold by the right dealers.
The debate that we've been having, whether we're pro or anti DBT, objective or subjective, cabling or non-cabling is about quality. For us, perceived quality is the main criteria by which we judge hi-fi.
Call me a cynic but I'm not convinced that quality comes very high in the priorities of the large manufacturers.
Good comments Steve. IMO this industry is no different to any other. It's our individual resposibility to make value judgements and purchases where our perception of value meets the restrictions of our pocket. There are examples where this balance stacks up and many where it doesnt. The Nordost Valhalla power cord debates were classic examples of the above. I attended the Nordost demo at Bristol and concluded the value/price ratio was left wanting.
Whilst I do feel cabling (from power to i/c to s/cables) *can* have considerable influence (this being relative to my perception of *considerable influence*) on the end-results of a components based system, this means I nether believe price is a guide to the net effect (ie. value), nor that all cabling has a noticable/any influence at all.
If most/all non-believers (to quote MichaelAB "there is
no difference") are not willing to use solid core, t&e (or similar) from beginning to end in their system, then surely they also acknowlege cabling has some influence. If so then this must be a debate about measurement of value and thus degrees of belief/disbelief in the effect.
The response from some people to this is likely to be "I'm not actually saying cabling has
no effect, just that cables with similar electrical properties but differing prices are not different", Well then this is a value based argument which undermines the apparently increasingly polarised camps. Ie. there are degrees of common ground/balanced views which are being deliberately ignored by a few.
In essence, my view point?
- Whist I have in the past found non-clinical A/B comaprisons useful I wouldnt aim to improve my system via this method alone.
- I have found some cable changes to have considerable benefits (to my ears) and others to have no benefit at all
- I accept some people have not in their empirical experience found cables (expensive or cheap) to benefit/affect their system
- The Hi-Fi press does not present a balanced view regarding cables.
- I think cables are increasingly overpriced and their vendors quite successful (I guess) in using seemingly illogical value/price ratio's to actually circumnavigate the sensibility of some people - ie. "£1750 for a power is so bizarre it must actually make sense".

but if I had a £30K+ system then this may well seem to make sense, yet there are still better effects to be gained elsewhere for less.
- That when trying new components and cables, the initial improvements can sound inconsequential, yet if the *upgrade* (or downgrade in some cases) is removed after an extended period (say a couple of weeks), the loss of the component/cable can be far more dramatically noticable and missed. I.e DBT would not help provide this appreciation.
- I find the determination of both extremes to stick to simplistic and absolutist positions (in some cases) now to be more about posturing ego's, their insecurities and point scoring than about the subject in question.
- <piousness>Some of the ongoing bad feeling to be a pretty poor show considering what we are talking about</piousness>.
- If you read this line then thanks and all that, but shouldnt you be working too?