michaelab
desafinado
I've been writing my reply to this thread offline so apologies for changing the tack slightly.
I didn't know that JC was involved in the Vertex AQ products but that doesn't change my view of them as extremely unlikely to do much of any great significance.
Perhaps I ought not to have started three threads ("RG has lost it", "Audiopiles vs Scientists" and this one) which all have some anti-cable bias but over the last month or so I've become gradually disillusioned with the whole cable thing and seeing good and respected mags like HiFi+ tout ever more expensive cable solutions with not the slightest justification (scientific or otherwise) for their cost is starting to get on my nerves.
I started to reflect on my own experiences with cables in my system and other peoples systems and came to the conclusion that I don't think I've ever heard any kind of cable ever make a difference that I think I could pick out in a...here we go again...DBT. Whilst I have reservations about DBTing I think that there is no reason that any difference that is more than subtle shouldn't be readily identifiable in a DBT. To put it another way, without getting into DBTs, I don't think I've ever heard any kind of cable ever make a difference that I would describe as anything more than subtle and that I couldn't be sure I wasn't imagining.
I still remember the first time I tested some cables. 3 sets of ICs. VDH D102MkIII, MF NuVista with Bullets, MF NuVista originals and even a pair of freebie plastic plug jobbies. I didn't hear any difference at all and I was using my Aracm A22 to switch inputs whilst listening to a track (my DAC20 of the time had dual analog outputs) so it was as close a comparison as is possible. I posted about that in the Portuguese hifi forum I take part in and António (Lowrider) suggest I try the tests out on his system. At the time I reported that I did then hear differences but if I'm honest with myself I don't think I really did. When you have someone next to you describing in great detail the differences they think they heard it's hard to admit that you heard no difference
Since then I added Eupen power cords to my system which I think made a noticeable improvement but again, when I think about it honestly I'm not sure the change wasn't my imagination. When I changed my speaker cable from Dynaudio OCOS to Townshend Isolda DCT I also can't honestly say I noticed any difference. The one single recent cable change where I did notice a differnence that was definitely not imaginary was when switching from using RCA coax to using TOSLink in connecting my transport to my DAC64. The improvement was quite marked. However, here we're talking about a completely different method of transmission, not to mention electrical isolation in the case of TOSLink so there are good scientific reasons why a difference might exist.
In short I reckon I've been, to some extent, suckered into the whole cable myth becuase it's so hard not to be when everyone around you and all magazines now take it as accepted fact that cables can make a huge difference. I'm not saying that cables necessarily make no difference at all but I simply can't accept the incredible claims that many people are making for them. The same goes for all other tweaks that exist which have absolutely no credible scientific basis to them. I'm henceforth not going to comment on the sonic benefits (or otherwise) of cables and everyone should disregard any comments I've made in the past about cables as I now find the judgements may not have been reliable
A second issue is the extortionate, bordering on criminal, prices that some cables go for. One thing thing is making a quality product with decent thick conductors and a nice quality jacket and charging a bit more for it than you're average bellwire freebie IC. Another thing is charging several hundred, or even several thousand pounds for something that is still, your basic metal conductor, some PTFE and a nice looking jacket. I'm sorry, it's just not on. In a dog eat dog world I suppose it's fine if Nordost et al want to exploit people mug enough to pay £1750 for a mains cable - doesn't prevent it from being immoral though. People can go on about R&D costs etc. but what how the hell do they R&D something when they don't (by their own admission) know how it works? One can only assume that thier "R&D" consists purely of trial and error. Eupen power cables at least make a specific claim (to reduce mains borne EMI and RF interfernce) which is backed up by scientific evidence.
On the issue of HiFi+, I still think it's one of the best, if not the best hifi mag out there. I'm not having a go at it in general. HiFi News is my other favourite but they also came up with an absolute classic in their April edition: in Ivor Humphreys' short review of the Alner Hamblin MF101 mains cleaning distribution block he comes out with "The differences are significant, on the verge of exceeding subtle."
In my book at least, "significant" is way beyond subtle.
That, folks was my inauguration speech into the league of sceptics
Michael.
I didn't know that JC was involved in the Vertex AQ products but that doesn't change my view of them as extremely unlikely to do much of any great significance.
Perhaps I ought not to have started three threads ("RG has lost it", "Audiopiles vs Scientists" and this one) which all have some anti-cable bias but over the last month or so I've become gradually disillusioned with the whole cable thing and seeing good and respected mags like HiFi+ tout ever more expensive cable solutions with not the slightest justification (scientific or otherwise) for their cost is starting to get on my nerves.
I started to reflect on my own experiences with cables in my system and other peoples systems and came to the conclusion that I don't think I've ever heard any kind of cable ever make a difference that I think I could pick out in a...here we go again...DBT. Whilst I have reservations about DBTing I think that there is no reason that any difference that is more than subtle shouldn't be readily identifiable in a DBT. To put it another way, without getting into DBTs, I don't think I've ever heard any kind of cable ever make a difference that I would describe as anything more than subtle and that I couldn't be sure I wasn't imagining.
I still remember the first time I tested some cables. 3 sets of ICs. VDH D102MkIII, MF NuVista with Bullets, MF NuVista originals and even a pair of freebie plastic plug jobbies. I didn't hear any difference at all and I was using my Aracm A22 to switch inputs whilst listening to a track (my DAC20 of the time had dual analog outputs) so it was as close a comparison as is possible. I posted about that in the Portuguese hifi forum I take part in and António (Lowrider) suggest I try the tests out on his system. At the time I reported that I did then hear differences but if I'm honest with myself I don't think I really did. When you have someone next to you describing in great detail the differences they think they heard it's hard to admit that you heard no difference
Since then I added Eupen power cords to my system which I think made a noticeable improvement but again, when I think about it honestly I'm not sure the change wasn't my imagination. When I changed my speaker cable from Dynaudio OCOS to Townshend Isolda DCT I also can't honestly say I noticed any difference. The one single recent cable change where I did notice a differnence that was definitely not imaginary was when switching from using RCA coax to using TOSLink in connecting my transport to my DAC64. The improvement was quite marked. However, here we're talking about a completely different method of transmission, not to mention electrical isolation in the case of TOSLink so there are good scientific reasons why a difference might exist.
In short I reckon I've been, to some extent, suckered into the whole cable myth becuase it's so hard not to be when everyone around you and all magazines now take it as accepted fact that cables can make a huge difference. I'm not saying that cables necessarily make no difference at all but I simply can't accept the incredible claims that many people are making for them. The same goes for all other tweaks that exist which have absolutely no credible scientific basis to them. I'm henceforth not going to comment on the sonic benefits (or otherwise) of cables and everyone should disregard any comments I've made in the past about cables as I now find the judgements may not have been reliable
A second issue is the extortionate, bordering on criminal, prices that some cables go for. One thing thing is making a quality product with decent thick conductors and a nice quality jacket and charging a bit more for it than you're average bellwire freebie IC. Another thing is charging several hundred, or even several thousand pounds for something that is still, your basic metal conductor, some PTFE and a nice looking jacket. I'm sorry, it's just not on. In a dog eat dog world I suppose it's fine if Nordost et al want to exploit people mug enough to pay £1750 for a mains cable - doesn't prevent it from being immoral though. People can go on about R&D costs etc. but what how the hell do they R&D something when they don't (by their own admission) know how it works? One can only assume that thier "R&D" consists purely of trial and error. Eupen power cables at least make a specific claim (to reduce mains borne EMI and RF interfernce) which is backed up by scientific evidence.
On the issue of HiFi+, I still think it's one of the best, if not the best hifi mag out there. I'm not having a go at it in general. HiFi News is my other favourite but they also came up with an absolute classic in their April edition: in Ivor Humphreys' short review of the Alner Hamblin MF101 mains cleaning distribution block he comes out with "The differences are significant, on the verge of exceeding subtle."
In my book at least, "significant" is way beyond subtle.That, folks was my inauguration speech into the league of sceptics
Michael.
trickster!! 
