Some sense creeping into the hifi press at last?

tum ti tum...

That $10k prize is for diffentiating amplifiers, not cables, I thought.

No-one's mentioned dielectric absorption yet (if that's the right name for it, I can't quite recall it).

Daneel gets the prize for first pointing out that if the FR/LCR-characteristics measure the same for two cables, they should sound the same - regardless of construction . IOW, if two similarly measuring cables sound different, something interesting is going on - worth a prize and certainly worth further investigation. At which point we look again at construction.

The hifi press seems to be coming to terms with the fact that cable differences are minimal if they can be heard at all. KK certainly said he'd had enough of the BS, whilst still acknowledging that differences existed and were audible! MC's recent reviews of Cardas also acknowledged the very tight limits of testing within which his review was meaningful (ie with *his* system that he knows back-to front, he can discern differences that are marginal but still distinct). As kK said earlier too, cable reviews are only meaningful for the system in which the reviews occurred. Fair enough I think...

I can remember the days when WHF (and HFW?) recommended 10% of your budged went on cables. Been a while since that recommendation last appeared in print!

Anyway, what the **** are you guys arguing about anyway?

Love, light and peace
Lord of Doom

 

WM - yes, because it came with the boxes it connects. Beyond that, I'm pretty much in line with Doomlord's comments above

M.

 

doomlord,
no one can remember it's just one of those topics that keeps rolling along until things get nasty and a mod stakes it through the heart.

michael,
i know i was just funnin'

cheers


julian

 

There are, AFAIK, several such prizes up for grabs and at least one of them is for cables and at least one of them is for amps. None of them has ever come close to being claimed.

Michael.

 

And of course the constant ridiculing of cables on this and other sites in the weeks leading up to your "discovery" had absolutely no influence whatsoever

 

Hello DL

I'll take that prize in the form of a chocolate chip cookie thanks

Have a read:

http://www.audioholics.com/FAQs/Audioquest.html

That particular point is convered briefly there.

This also makes interesting reading:

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/audioprinciples/interconnects/Audio-Cable-Vendor.html

 

oh dear,
having read the above links all i can think is: what sad emptly little lives the people at audioholics have. they are running round making mountains out of molehills. perhaps the ONLY thing that rang true was a quote from audioquest in response to the battery biasing thing

this has been proven both at the site given and on most audio forums time and again.
but of course even that quote was twisted in the reply it engendered and when the twisting was challenged - it was dropped without even an apology. rude too then.
cheers


julian

 

I've been listening to music rather than wasting time posting in threads like this. Its been far more productive and enjoyable. Perhaps the audioholics should try it! Do they even like music?

 

IMHO all cable sceptics have been suggesting indeed just this. Listen to the music rather then minute differences between cables.

 

Wolfgang,

When one has a system sounding as good as mine which has been optimised with correct use of good quality cables and supports, one tends to forget the system and just listen to the music. I haven't tinkered with my system for months! I dont need to.

 

I suspect if the audio world was a larger affair advertising standards may be interested in cable manufacturers marketing spiel. I think given the small size of the market though its just not going to happen.

Nice link Daneel. I wish I had the engineering background to understand it fully myself. I think the fact that very few of us do, is what makes our own little tests and DBT's a futile pursuit.

A great project for a student studying the subject at university though, isnt it? - testing the science of cable manufacturers using university equipment, and testing measurably similar cables using DBT. I'd like to read the result

 

It's been done in a manner of speaking (testing of different materials and how they respond/differ over various frequency ranges). I've met a few online, they become cable sceptics.

I agree with Wolfgang's statement but with the word minimal replaced with inaudible

I've already given the reason why I bother with threads like this.

My system also sounds excellent but I'm afraid I can't say I don't tinker.

Bottleneck - Some articles to help with understanding:

http://www.bluejeanscable.com/articles/index.htm

On a cable manufacturer's/retailer's site no less. I'll leave it to you to decide where there is or isn't bias.

 

As opposed to the happy, full lives people changing cables to "improve" sound quality have?

I see nothing sad about trying to get rid of misinformation.

I await your explaination or links to evidence explaining why any of the arguments audioholics made were wrong.

 

An important aspect must be stated. The system being used for cable testing needs to be one that is sensitive to even subtle changes. This is, of course, particularly true of the loudspeakers involved.

Poor or average hi-fi speakers are not up to the task. Speakers that are adequate can be chosen on the basis of an analysis of their impulse and impedance measurements. Those that exhibit a slow attack or slow decay, those which exhibit strong resonances due to inadequacies in the enclosure design or those which have phase problems caused by inferior crossover design are likely to mask any effect that changing the cables may have.

 

If the differences are as large as many claim, they should be apparent with "lesser" kit too I would have thought.

-- Ian

 

I agree entirely 7_V. I'm not quite sure what it has to do with my post though. In the section you quoted I was talking about measurement not listening testing. Was it just in respsonse to the last sentence?

I would suggest though that many problems (room response for example) can be avoided and costs greatly lowered for the same level of sound if you go with headphones. It wasn't until I got my 926s that I felt my system was in the same league as my Sennheiser HD580s.

Unfortunately I far prefer the presentation of music given by speakers to that of headphones, otherwise I might have just stopped with the HD580s.

If I'm trying to hear very small differences between compontents I'll always try the headphones.

 

Yes. Talk of 'minimal' and 'inaudible' prompted my post is all.

Headphones are a good idea - unless we're testing speaker cables.

 

Well, that ridiculing (and it was anything but constant) pales into insignificance against the barrage of "information" in the hifi press and on hifi/av forums everywhere pushing the line that cables make a difference as if it were a well established fact.

If you look at the general picture, the cable believers view is vastly more prevalent than the view of the sceptics. If one was susceptible to pressure one would tend to side with the "established" view of the cable believers.

Michael.

 

Micheal,
I wish you were closer to home. I would happily show you the difference it made to my kit. The biggest change was replacing an MF I/C.
Not saying your wrong, nor would i want to push my beliefs on you, I just think it would be interesting.

 

but penanace, were the cables level matched and electrically identical? or were they broken?
cheers


julian