New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Power Cables... Really? - Page 9  

post #121 of 417
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prog Rock Man View Post

Pre ebay audiophiles had to buy from the named brands who found that they could charge silly prices for their cables. Now with ebay not is it easier to buy the parts to make your own, it is also easier to buy cables made with the audiophile in mind, but not at silly prices.


After reading Big Poppas success with Furutech - I tried DIY Furutech and the results were me taking expensive cables back for a refund.

post #122 of 417
Quote:
Originally Posted by SP Wild View Post




After reading Big Poppas success with Furutech - I tried DIY Furutech and the results were me taking expensive cables back for a refund.

 

Same here but with ICs. I bought some Rean phonos and Van Damme cable and made my own. If you count the cost of the soldering kit I bought to make them and some cheap phonos and cable to learn to solder on, the three ICs I have made (I have given two away) cost about £25 each. Ebay sellers are selling the same ICs as I made for about £18.

post #123 of 417
Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG POPPA View Post

Point being, after a certain point with your gear, a good power cable becomes a necessary piece of equipment.


Point being, what certain point is that and what besides the $$$ determines that point?

 

Also point being, if only very resolving gear can resolve the differences power cables make, how are they worth the premium charged, or the time to make? Again, you enjoy making them, but not everyone will, and not everyone can afford the alternative.

 

Besides, I wouldn't call your gear especially resolving if your signature is correct.

post #124 of 417

I would call you very UNlucky, if your gear responds so wildly to various power cables - I would imagine this is the result of both very poor power supplies, and poor circuit layouts which are so sensitive to noise

 

thankfully my gear is good enough that I have never heard a difference with the power cables I have demoed 
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG POPPA View Post

Sometimes we are lucky enough to have gear that power cables make a difference.


Edited by El_Doug - 6/19/10 at 1:46pm
post #125 of 417
Quote:
Originally Posted by haloxt View Post

..

 

But my ears aren't that sensitive to power cables, or my power cables just aren't that much better than my various stock 14 awg power cables. I asked an aftermarket cable manufacturer if they could make a 2" cable for me with high quality copper connectors, but they said no, because it would break from flexing. I theorize that maybe it is because they know no cable cables sounds better and don't want me to find out. Could someone tell me if this sounds better than high quality power cables?

If power cords don't make any difference for you, lucky you (seriously), you have clean power in your room.  

 

A boutique power cord works as a fancy filter, to reduce the high frequency noise (from cell phones signals, computer power supplys, other little switching power supplies in your room, motors) before it reaches your amp. The noise frequencies themselves might be beyond our hearing range, but the beat frequency can be audiable. A large isolation transformer works better than a boutique power cord for filtering, but the isolation transformer will be super heavy, not a tweak for everybody.

 

A 2" power cord will do no good, there isn't enough lenght for it to work as a filter.
 

post #126 of 417

I think I hear a difference, but I wouldn't trust myself to give a good subjective critique of power cables. There's certain things in my audio chain I think may a difference, but I have a hard time telling. Maybe if I had ten foot ones, but... too lazy to experiment :p.

post #127 of 417
Quote:
Originally Posted by Head Injury View Post


Point being, what certain point is that and what besides the $$$ determines that point?

 

Also point being, if only very resolving gear can resolve the differences power cables make, how are they worth the premium charged, or the time to make? Again, you enjoy making them, but not everyone will, and not everyone can afford the alternative.

 

Besides, I wouldn't call your gear especially resolving if your signature is correct.

My signature is correct but not complete. Not enough room. Yes this hobby takes money like any other hobby. Nature of the beast. Yes some have bigger budgets. It would not be very interesting if everybody spent the same on their rigs.
 

post #128 of 417
Thread Starter 

Thanks for all the comments everyone, this is turning out to be a rather fun discussion (for me at least!). Slim, thanks for you're comments especially. I never thought that quantum processes might have an effect on human aural perception, which is to say that it i find it very intriguing and something I'll begin thought experiments on for the rest of my life! Unfortunately I have very little classical training in quantum physics so there's nothing I can comment on your postings directly.

 

Once I am able to buy a nice oscilloscope and A/D i still want to try the experiment that I outlined a few pages ago. Although I do agree that doing the experiment right is paramount! And, as some of my professor's have told me "proving something right is relatively easy, but proving something wrong is much harder."

 

Anyways, just wanted to say thanks for all the comments, and hopefully I'll have something good to share soon.

post #129 of 417

 

 

 

"Did I say you have to? I am just asking how often have tests been done the way being done in the case we're discussing. You say tests have been done in the past, I just asked how many were done testing the time domain. You can say a number, or a percentage, you don't have to experiment or gather data.

-cut-

I did raise a question about your claim that we're putting "blind faith in that single study", in the form of asking just how relevant those "hundreds of other ones that have been trying to prove the opposite" are to the nordost experiments. To prove the opposite of what nordost is doing, you have to test the same thing and get the opposite conclusion. You must test the time domain. Can you tell me what percentage of those hundreds of tests have tested the thing nordost is testing? If it is not testing the same thing, it is not trying to prove the opposite. I hope you understand, I don't in any way want you to do any experiments to prove anything."

 

 

My apologies.  I misread your sentence and thought you were asking me how much times 'I' have personally done these experiments.. 

 

I think you misinterpreted my point as well though.. The hundreds of other contradictory reports don't serve to disprove the Nordost study.  The hundreds of studies support the fact that people can't hear a difference between two cables or between two reasonably-made power sources.  Studies showing that people CAN hear differences between two identical equipment when they think the equipment has been changed.  These hundreds of tests don't disprove the nordost test, but the nordost test doesn't disprove those other hundreds of tests either.  

How can you say we should keep an open mind when you're only looking at one side of the argument?  

 

And you make it sound like measuring something in the "time domain" is something new and revolutionary...

excuse me if I'm wrong but what they're doing seems like extremely basic/common stuff.. simple null test... subtraction and addition.. done all the time.  I actually did come across a test very similar to the Nordost one, using recording/studio equipment.. but in that case, the test was used to prove that there was no difference.

 

"Two words: preliminary report."

 

Do they plan on releasing an actual report, or just feed us enough information to stir something up?

The preliminary report by itself doesn't inspire too much confidence, but they might sway my mind if they can actually put together a accurate, complete, and well-written report.

 

JamesL I see your point, but you make a simple component like a power cable more cumbersome than it really is. If you are trying to save money and only purchase on proven facts and not what sounds good to you it will not be a fun hobby. Power cables are easy to deal with. I would first define the strengths and weakness's of your gear and find a character in a power cable to compliment your rig. For example: My tube amp can get a little too warm and fuzzy for my taste. I made a power cable with SPC and Rhodium connectors to deal with that. I learned the characteristics of the different metals used to make power cables and made one to suit my needs.

 

hey big poppa.. No, it doesn't seem like you see the point.  

I'm not "-saving money by only purchasing on proven facts and not what sounds good to me-"

I simply don't bother fiddling around and doing ridiculous stuff with my power cord.  

When you eat a meal, do you enjoy it better by switching out and auditioning the silverware? Sure, I guess you can argue that some silverware and metallurgy imparts a different flavor on your food, but most of the appeal of choosing nice flatware/dinnerware is in the presentation.  

Ask anyone else ... which one of us is making .. and let me quote you, "a simple component like a power cable more cumbersome than it really is"  I certainly don't think its me.

post #130 of 417
Quote:
Originally Posted by AudioCats View Post



If power cords don't make any difference for you, lucky you (seriously), you have clean power in your room.  

 

A boutique power cord works as a fancy filter, to reduce the high frequency noise (from cell phones signals, computer power supplys, other little switching power supplies in your room, motors) before it reaches your amp. The noise frequencies themselves might be beyond our hearing range, but the beat frequency can be audiable. A large isolation transformer works better than a boutique power cord for filtering, but the isolation transformer will be super heavy, not a tweak for everybody.

 

A 2" power cord will do no good, there isn't enough lenght for it to work as a filter.
 


A cable won't filter anything.  An actual power conditioner will do the job nicely however.  That's something that actually can make a difference.  You'd have to have some really terrible power, insanely resolving gear, or some mix of both for it to make a very large difference though.  They're much more useful for keeping your gear safe from spikes and surges than at making it sound better though.

post #131 of 417
Quote:
How can you say we should keep an open mind when you're only looking at one side of the argument? 

 

Quote:
 I actually did come across a test very similar to the Nordost one, using recording/studio equipment.. but in that case, the test was used to prove that there was no difference.

 

 

I know pro-cablers face an uphill battle. I am not ignoring all the studies done in the past, I just know that if people feel like doing experiments, they should, and someone who knows how crazy audiophile claims get knows that nordost is using pretty creative new ways of testing audio equipment. It is true they may be ultimately just running over the same ground or fudging data, but from what I see they've found creative new ways to tackle problems, which tests that set forth "to prove that there was no difference" aren't likely to ever think of. And the equipment used are finer measuring tools of most prior tests, but it remains to be seen just how rigorous their test is. Let's say the nordost study claims to be a success in the future, of course I'd expect other people to eventually try to verify or disprove their claims. In fact if nordost/acuity aren't transparent about the experiment for others to do it themselves I'd simply ignore their results as there's obvious conflict of interest. The pessimist in me thinks Nordost is just going to cause pro-cablers and anti-cablers to become even more entrenched in their stubborn beliefs, which is the proper climate for selling multi-thousand dollar cables.


Edited by haloxt - 6/20/10 at 4:38am
post #132 of 417
Quote:
Originally Posted by haloxt View Post

I know pro-cablers face an uphill battle. I am not ignoring all the studies done in the past, I just know that if people feel like doing experiments, they should, and someone who knows how crazy audiophile claims get knows that nordost is using pretty creative new ways of testing audio equipment. It is true they may be ultimately just running over the same ground or fudging data, but from what I see they've found creative new ways to tackle problems, which tests that set forth "to prove that there was no difference" aren't likely to ever think of. And the equipment used are finer measuring tools of most prior tests, but it remains to be seen just how rigorous their test is. Let's say the nordost study claims to be a success in the future, of course I'd expect other people to eventually try to verify or disprove their claims. In fact if nordost/acuity aren't transparent about the experiment for others to do it themselves I'd simply ignore their results as there's obvious conflict of interest. The pessimist in me thinks Nordost is just going to cause pro-cablers and anti-cablers to become even more entrenched in their stubborn beliefs, which is the proper climate for selling multi-thousand dollar cables.


For other gear, there isn't so much uproar about audible differences where none exist through DBT's, simply because there are measurable differences that many would consider potentially audible.  This isn't so with the cables.  Once measurable differences that could affect sound are discovered, the attitudes will likely change.

post #133 of 417
Quote:
Originally Posted by maverickronin View Post


A cable won't filter anything.  An actual power conditioner will do the job nicely however.  That's something that actually can make a difference.  You'd have to have some really terrible power, insanely resolving gear, or some mix of both for it to make a very large difference though.  They're much more useful for keeping your gear safe from spikes and surges than at making it sound better though.


 

like I said, why argue, just ask your professor ( not the one that eats hot pocket all day) 

 

:D
 

post #134 of 417
Quote:
Originally Posted by AudioCats View Post

like I said, why argue, just ask your professor ( not the one that eats hot pocket all day) 

 

:D

I don't need to ask any professor.  I have built filters, L-nets, amplifier circuits etc.  To my knowledge cable does not filter.  Cable does not have the frequency response to filter anything.   Shame on whoever that said cable filters, you really need to look up what a filter truely is or does.  Seriously, I'm just shocked at how some of the believers arrive at their conclusions...  If you do not have an explaination, how much is the conclusion worth??  

 

@slim.a  

I am appalled that you stated that engineers do not think outside the box.  Look around you, you think everything around you came from people that think inside the box?  Engineers solve problems.  period.  
 


Edited by High_Q - 6/20/10 at 11:46am
post #135 of 417
Quote:
Originally Posted by aimlink View Post




For other gear, there isn't so much uproar about audible differences where none exist through DBT's, simply because there are measurable differences that many would consider potentially audible.  This isn't so with the cables.  Once measurable differences that could affect sound are discovered, the attitudes will likely change.


I am not so sure about that aimlink. Jitter is held as the reason why digital cables can sound different, but there is still a lot of disagreement about the role, if any of jitter. We need a measurable difference than then correlates to 'better sound quality' and for that to be repeated again and again, particularly under blind testing, to stand any chance of a change in attitude.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
This thread is locked