The "truth" about different speaker cables

[spanimal]

Why do people that disagree with the fact the audio cables can alter sound characteristics always start with - EXPENSIVE CABLES.

If I have never paid for cables - and I own only CHEAPIES - yet I can clearly distinguish between them, where is my motivation, in psychological terms, to imagine a difference to justify my expenditure when the expenditure on cables = 0.

[Bullseye]

Because expensive cables for the fact of being expensive are the most rip-off thing in audio equipment (audio related to cables, NO WAY)

[spanimal]

So too are half million dollar amplifiers - Still I will not tell him the changes are in his head. That would just be disrespectful. KAPISH.

[Bullseye]

Why disrespectful if it is the truth? Plus weren't you skeptic about cables?

[silverskull]

then im really confused as im still a beginner here.i've seen LOD made out of pure silver cables.will that improve the SQ of what im hearing as well?or will that like stated in the webpage will not do any difference as well?thanks in advance if you could answer me=)

and regarding headphones being replaced by cyro copper cables and Lune cables and etc, will that improve the earphone's performance as well?

[Bullseye]

Originally Posted by silverskull

then im really confused as im still a beginner here.i've seen LOD made out of pure silver cables.will that improve the SQ of what im hearing as well?or will that like stated in the webpage will not do any difference as well?thanks in advance if you could answer me=)

and regarding headphones being replaced by cyro copper cables and Lune cables and etc, will that improve the earphone's performance as well?

Actually any cable well built, either silver, copper, or any metal with good coductivity will not affect the SQ at all.

When people claim they hear SQ improvements is because they are under placebo effect, or that the "comparison" they are making against other cables is not really a comparison and is flawed. Output levels were not matched, cable A had oxide in some part and it was not noticed, ...

If you are afraid that by not using expensive cables you will not achieve audio nirvana, fear no more, because that is not the truth.

Cables are passive equipment, they do not change SQ.

[silverskull]

Originally Posted by Bullseye

Actually any cable well built, either silver, copper, or any metal with good coductivity will not affect the SQ at all.

When people claim they hear SQ improvements is because they are under placebo effect, or that the "comparison" they are making against other cables is not really a comparison and is flawed. Output levels were not matched, cable A had oxide in some part and it was not noticed, ...

If you are afraid that by not using expensive cables you will not achieve audio nirvana, fear no more, because that is not the truth.

Cables are passive equipment, they do not change SQ.

Great news!im sticking to the most basic lod then.my wallet would be glad to hear that.thanks for the tips.

[fzman]

1. good cables don't have to be expensive, and expensive cables aren't always good.
2. Just because YOU can't tell cables apart by listening to them, doesn't mean they aren't audibly different.
3. "different" and "better" mean two different things.
4. shouldn't there be some consensus as to WHAT to measure before deciding whether some limited set of measurements "proves" anything about cable importance or audible differences?
5. what would it acutally take to get the cable nay-sayers to acknowledge that cables make an audible difference-- that is, what would consititute appropriate evidence? Karl Popper has argued that a theory which cannot be disproved is simply rhetoric-- and this applies equally to both sides of this long-standing debate.

inquiring minds want to know.

[Bullseye]

1. Good cables are not expensive, they are well built. (In fact they are very cheap to build) Expensive cables are snake oil.
2. Yeah, great argument, it must be my ears, and later my equipment that is not expensive enough...
3. Indeed
4. The measurements already give you enough data, which some of it you can't gasp with your hearing capabilities. Then when some people claim the "soundstage expanded", "more clarity", etc, where is the physical data that shows us that "soundstage expansion"? I can answer to that. There is none.
5. It would take that pigs fly, wait, swine flu... Physical evidence. Measurements that show us Cable A is significantly better than Cable B. After that the price for that "improvement".

We are talking about science here. We are talking from a scientific point of view. There are indeed some differences between some cables, but they are located way far away from the audible human limits. >80 KHz and so on. (Read article) If you ask me if I have to believe what some people's experience says compared to what measurements made by way more sensitive equipment than our own ears tell us, I go with the measurements hands down.

I am not saying all this measurements are absolute, but comparing "experience" 0% proof of anything, to measurements that say there is NO difference (>0% -can't give percentage as I don't know it-) the answer doesn't need to be thought a lot, does it?

There are another very interesting articles I have found that I will upload some day I have time to organize it well. Now with all the Can Jam stuff and HF-2 unveiling we are occupied, but expect it to come some day soon.

Silverskull, you made a great decision. If you ever find yourself with some "audiophile cables" in your hands, and you "hear some improvement", stop for a second, try to search for the flaws of your test (perfect volume matching, not just ear matching), what you read somewhere, hype for the fancy looking cable, etc... Something as easy as more volume can give advantage to one thing over the other. I also encourage you try DBT (Double Blind Testing)

[JaZZ]

Originally Posted by silverskull

then im really confused as im still a beginner here.i've seen LOD made out of pure silver cables.will that improve the SQ of what im hearing as well?or will that like stated in the webpage will not do any difference as well?thanks in advance if you could answer me=)

and regarding headphones being replaced by cyro copper cables and Lune cables and etc, will that improve the earphone's performance as well?

With the equipment in your sig, without badmouthing it, if you really want improvements, there's a lot you can do before even considering cables. They won't do much compared to a better source, a better amp or a better headphone. That's not to say they don't do anything, but in your current state of the hobby cables have the last priority on your to-do list.
.

[nick_charles]

Originally Posted by fzman

5. what would it acutally take to get the cable nay-sayers to acknowledge that cables make an audible difference-- that is, what would consititute appropriate evidence?

As a skeptic **carefully** controlled **double** blind tests would do it for me. A minimum of 10 trials and a minimum score of 8/10 for statistical power. For loudspeaker cables add average level matching (+/- 0.1db) since with a long enough run a gauge difference (like Monster did with their absurd tests) can cause notable attenuation differences which are ewasily detectable.

[silverskull]

Originally Posted by JaZZ

With the equipment in your sig, without badmouthing it, if you really want improvements, there's a lot you can do before even considering cables. They won't do much compared to a better source, a better amp or a better headphone. That's not to say they don't do anything, but in your current state of the hobby cables have the last priority on your to-do list.
.

thanks for the pointer.then i will not even bother on the cables then.because i have been reading around the forums and noticed ppl with crazy cables thats why i thought it would be nice to upgrade the cables.well they made their cables looked like it would mega boost the SQ.but like you said,cables should be my last worries ,second last would be an amp ^^

[endless402]

LOD cables arent worth it when the source quality isnt that great to begin with



so a guy that uses Fiio E5 / E3 and Little Dot I+ is trying to tell ppl that cables dont make a difference....

[Bullseye]

Originally Posted by endless402

LOD cables arent worth it when the source quality isnt that great to begin with



so a guy that uses Fiio E5 / E3 and Little Dot I+ is trying to tell ppl that cables dont make a difference....

Well, you got that wrong!

The article was not written by me. I am not an oscilloscope nor any of the test equipment they used for this article. Then as I mentioned a lot of times, experience is not necessary, as it can be easily flawed. (Even so I have experience with some cables, including DIY cables I made myself). And i don't know what different amplifiers have to do with cables. If you want me to try any cable, you can send it to me, I will try it and will give it back.

Then again, if you can't hear any difference is because your equipment is not good enough, like my Little Dot I+ amp... I think you are the first one to give that opinion... (Not)

The site who holds that article (Matrix-Hifi) was created by people who owned very high end equipment, including cables, and decided to find out what was hiding behind all of those magic properties cables seem to have for some people. They have done a lot of DBT between CD players, amplifiers, speakers (expensive ones), cables, and one of their results is that cables do not sound. Hence any "audiophile cable" is a rip-off.

They also have articles like this that back up all the information. Nick charles by himself also did some interesting tests.
So I would like to ask you, as a believer you seem to be, when you say that the "soundstage expanded", or that the "bass became more punchy", could you give me measured results in the frequency response that support that?

I will answer that to you, you can't.

Oh, and please explain your first sentence, give me the data that says X source is not "that great".

[Stoin]

After reading the article I do have a few issues (not related to the translation). Here are some of those:

Firstly, and as already mentioned, the author has effectively stated their conclusions in the opening paragraph (and even the title) through their choice of tone.

The numbers used in places seem to be plucked from nowhere, with no justification. Why are they driving their speakers with 80W?

The speakers mentioned are 8 Ohm. Fine, it is a reasonable value. But, the author seems to regard this as a constant and it never seems to change. In fact the impedance of a speaker varies with frequency.

There are other faults with the article, but these alone would stop it from being published in a journal. One of the problems with any debate such as this is the use of the word "science" this article is not written in a scientific manner and has no supporting evidence or references for the claims it makes and values used. It also makes no attempt to mention other factors that may have an influence, but which were not studied. It presents everything as fact and if you don't believe the author then you are a fool.

I don't buy £1000 cables, nor am I likely to. I do believe that CAT5 cable can be used very effectively for wiring up loudspeakers. I'm not exactly certain on my views on cables (although I don't use freebies), but I do know that articles such as this add no knowledge to the debate, only opinion.

In fairness to the OP, they never said it would be scientific, but that they had translated an article and to that end they've done a good job.