HiFi+....at it again!

Think outside of the box(es) chaps. A 400 GBP mains cable may yet deliver as much if not more than a 2000 GBP power supply if the power lead was correctly designed...
 
Steven

I admit that I have not done the test, but saying that a £400 cable gives better results than a £2000 box is like saying a set of alloy wheels makes your car go faster.

I am not for one minute disputing that a cable can affect the sound, but a XPS added onto a CDX totally transforms it and this has been testified by loads of people.

Going off track, you may note that I supported your observations ref the acrylic shelving because we all know that racks do make a difference. But here again, the general policy is buy the best boxes you can and then buy the racking of your choice afterwards.

Boxes / speakers are the two main ingredients of a system, cables improve it but they need the boxes to begin with.

Regards

Mick
 
Mick, I've found that between boxes and speakers, cables are something of a must.
 
due to dodgy room (house actually!) acoustics, my speakers ended up being cyrus icon x4's. i know these are not that popular , but they work well for me. anyway they cost£2700 and are fed by cyrus apa7 amps, another £2000 and my speaker cables? - tnt audio twisted twin cat5 data cable in a biwire set up. the cost of the12 banana plugs is more than the leads themselves.
i could go out and buy whatever leads i want, but i'm happy with the sound. i will possibly have my eyes well and truly opened if the norfolk bake off goes ahead, but for now i feel i am saving hundreds of pounds by not getting caught up in the 'cable are everything' campaign
 
"I admit that I have not done the test, but saying that a £400 cable gives better results than a £2000 box is like saying a set of alloy wheels makes your car go faster."

Who claims this?
A lot of "straw man" arguments and mis-statments seamed to be used in this debate.

I find there are problems with the cable issue.I believe a lot are too expensive for what they offer, but do believe good quality cable and connectors is very important to achieving a good sound.
But all I seam to come across are extreme arguments , either The Russ andrews type, "spend thousands on my cables and don't bother with equipment" or the other extreme ,"use any old crap cable it doent matter."

Where is the balance inbetween?
 
Balance in between = use whatever makes you happy, but don't expect everyone else to make the same choices.

-- Ian
 
It's hard to have balance in this discussion: some people genuinely do believe cables make little or no appreciable difference, others genuinely believe they do. I know which side of the argument I'm on, you know which side you're on, the position in the middle isn't necessarily more correct than either of the polarised positions.

-- Ian
 
"the position in the middle isn't necessarily more correct than either of the polarised positions."

Sorry thats not what I ment either.I mean in the type of argumentation used to promote either view point.People seem to be misquoting a lot , using bad analogies or using analogies to prove a point (which is wrong) and straw man arguments ( arguments that attack a view point thatis similair to but in fact not held by the oppostion ).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Originally posted by 7_V

The best systems use balanced components that sound good together.

The current UK's over-emphasis on PRaT to the exclusion of timbre, imagery, neutrality, transparency, detail, dynamics or other aspects of sound quality, is another example of an imbalance, born out of the Linn/Naim marketing department. PRaT was sold by Linn and Naim because it was what they thought their equipment did best. The British hi-fi public has been brain-washed with this imbalance in just the same way as with the 'source first', 'cables first' or 'support first' doctrines. PRaT is important but so are the other aspects of sound quality. We can see the 'PRaT first' doctrine extending to a greater or lesser extent through all the UK forums, including this one.
Click to expand...

MR Speakerman sir,
I'm gunna differ here, over the 12 months or so, I have found the complete opposite, most systems we've 'Fettled with' have been almost entirely 'Air-headish', mostly majoring on Image/stage/space/air/ in most cases the bigger the better.
Very few have had 'true PRaT', without mechanical contrivence or 'Forced un-natural pace', it's a rare commodity. But done right is superb.
Inducing 'music' into these systems is indeed enlighting, in same way giving a PRaT system real detail and image with textious depth is also :) inducing.
You can have a more than happy medium, which would surprise a few people, but then you know that already.
A balanced system that achieves total cohesion is more attractive than any so called flat/round doctirine (imho)
 
A sensible balance

Chaps

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Where is the balance inbetween?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I suppose this will make some of you groan, but Naim actually take the worry out of cabling and produce some good value stuff.

I also admire their integrity in the sense they could produce similar stuff in say a green covering and sell it at £50 per metre and it would most certainly sell. However, they sell what is best for their customers at reasonable prices.

Regards

Mick
 
Yes, but Naim owners seem just as prone to finding things to tweak as anyone else, supports, mains, cable directions, fuses, you name it.

So there.

-- Ian
 
Ian

Regretably you may be right. I suspect, however, it is mainly restricted to "forumy" types. Most hifi users are happy with what they have got and reckon that those such as we are somewhat wierd.

Regards

Mick
 
Originally posted by spxy
I mean in the type of argumentation used to promote either view point.People seem to be misquoting a lot , using bad analogies or using analogies to prove a point (which is wrong) and straw man arguments ( arguments that attack a view point thatis similair to by in fact not held by the oppostion ).
Click to expand...

Ah, I see what you mean. I suspect the bad analogies come from reading too many hi-fi reviews, the straw man arguments are because anyone who gets exercised enough about subjective preferences in audio equipment to hang around a forum is clearly utterly daft, with no sense of perspective, and a need to invent huge distinctions that don't really exist in the real world.

-- Ian *

* Utterly daft, obviously
 
Originally posted by wadia-miester
... most systems we've 'Fettled with' have been almost entirely 'Air-headish', mostly majoring on Image/stage/space/air/ in most cases the bigger the better.
Very few have had 'true PRaT', without mechanical contrivence or 'Forced un-natural pace', it's a rare commodity. But done right is superb.
Inducing 'music' into these systems is indeed enlighting, in same way giving a PRaT system real detail and image with textious depth is also :) inducing.
Click to expand...
Introducing PRaT to a system that lacks it or space to a system that lacks that, is 'a good thing', as is adding better timbre and the tonal qualities that I tend to go for myself.

But the way you have made this point emphasizes the case I was making (on the RA thread, I think). You describe inducing 'music' into a non-PRaT system but (only) giving detail, image and depth to a PRaT system. Your choice of phrase is itself biased, as if PRaT is the 'music' that needs to be added.

Music is whatever turns you on. The Japanese audiophiles cut all this crap and just talk about whether a system conveys emotion or not. Of course, what conveys the emotion for one person is not necessarily what does it for another. For me, I find that sometimes there can be more music in a fifty year old valve radio than many modern over-PRaTified systems. And I have no problem whatsoever tapping my feet or dancing to it either - you noticed? :)
Perhaps an over-emphasis on PRaT is something that's necessary for the rhythmically challenged.

I sentence you to a three month re-balancing holiday in the wonderful world of Dr. Harvey Gizmo , for the duration of which you may only read or post on the SH Forum. You may take one luxury item - a blue led :D

"Welcome back my friends to the show that never ends."
 
Mick,

Alloy wheels would only improve a car's performance if they were actually lighter than the steel ones they replace.

Often they are heavier.

Don't you just love strawmen?
 
Steve,

While I do sympthise with your plight, PRaT is not just about Tapping your feet, (any nait 2 with kans and lp12 can do this without question), but having the whole envelope is a different matter, while true Hifi Buff's go for total tonal, accuracy & neutrality above all else, I believe that adding an 'element' of music into the mix can bring benefits to both parties.
Also this emotion thing, is 2 way also.
A lot of Classical buff's 'use the phrase 'moved to tears' on certain emotive pieces of music, where they feel the true essence of the composer is being relayed by the musicians playing the composion.
Thats their emotion, me it leaves cold, my emotion if you like comes from being immused inside the preformance of the band, not just the footapping as you say, Key involvment in a combination of emotion and being swept along with the presence of the preformance.
Of all the systems I've heard, the best ones have an 'Element' of colouration, this I feel it what defines each individuals affinity to a given system/sound. T.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top