Is It Really Worth 'Upgrading' Sennheiser HD 580/600/650 Cables? - Page 9

double post

double post

Something that is very clear is that threads like this, that primarily involve a debate get lots of pro-cable participation. But threads that start with a bit of science and ask for examples, don't.  Why do those who have the ability to hear differences not readily sibmit themselves to hearing and blind testing?

Quote:

Originally Posted by p a t r i c k 

I see that one of the cable manufacturers has participated in the thread.

 

On this web page:

 

Warren Audio Catalog

 

Several cables are described as being the product of "exhaustive research".

 

I would like to know what the "exhaustive research" consisted of.

 

I would also like to know what the results of the "exhaustive research" are.

Research involving vibrations and how they can affect the lower end of the audio spectrum, as well as the improvements to be had when those vibrations are either eliminated, or when the conductors themselves are no longer subject to the said vibrations. We also worked closely with a team of engineers in CA, perfecting our design and calculating out the best distances between conductors, opposing signals, and shielding, to allow for lowest possible capacitance, maximum flexibility, flex strength, and ultimate flex life. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rick 

Research involving vibrations and how they can affect the lower end of the audio spectrum, as well as the improvements to be had when those vibrations are either eliminated, or when the conductors themselves are no longer subject to the said vibrations.

Has this research produced a paper as is normal practice ?

Where can I obtain this paper?

Presumably there is good evidence for your statement that vibrations (presumably mechanical) influence the signal in the cable.

Cables can, of course, be microphonic, but here the flex of the cable is generating electricity and then a signal. If you don't flex the cable then there is generally no problem.

In what way do mechanical vibrations affect the lower end of the spectrum?

I think that this information is common knowledge for any cable manufacturer.

In what way have you advanced this field?

Looking at the cables at your website it is impossible to reconcile the extraordinarily high prices with what is materially on offer.

If you have conducted research which has advanced the science of cable manufacture then this would be understandable.

Presumably the innovations then included in the cables are patented?

I would like to know the patent numbers for the work you have carried out.

I'm sorry, but those papers are classified as of this time. Currently awaiting patent pending status. 

As per your other questions:

No it is not common knowledge, as there is nothing "common" about our design. Especially when speaking of conductor placement.

And as per your comment on our pricing:   we have some of the lowest priced headphone cables on the market, and as far as quality is concerned they compete with some of the highest priced headphone cables on the market. So I'm not exactly sure what you are referring to, but as our customers often tell us, they are worth every penny, and then some.

I don't see any reason for going up the price-ladder when there's Supra MBS -> http://www.jenving.se/microphn.htm for $3 pr. meter. How on earth do one justify going for something more exclusive using only science?

Everyone is welcome to their own opinions. Your best bet is to try one, and possibly find the answer to your question for yourself.

Was nice talking with you, 

Rick Warren

Warren Audio

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rick 

 

Research involving vibrations and how they can affect the lower end of the audio spectrum, as well as the improvements to be had when those vibrations are either eliminated, or when the conductors themselves are no longer subject to the said vibrations. We also worked closely with a team of engineers in CA, perfecting our design and calculating out the best distances between conductors, opposing signals, and shielding, to allow for lowest possible capacitance, maximum flexibility, flex strength, and ultimate flex life. 

My guess would be that this research was consulting with the cable/wire manufacturer about what product design they could offer on an efficient basis. Otherwise, I don't really see how a company the size of Warren Audio has anywhere near enough capitol to contract a team of engineers. But I'm all for patents, there are hundreds on such fascinating fields as perpetual motion machines.
 

Actually, it costed me (or my investor rather) roughly $20,000.

I want to make a cable that is worse than the stock 650 cable. What materials will be terrible, yet electrically safe?

Jeff wrote:

I want to make a cable that is worse than the stock 650 cable. What materials will be terrible, yet electrically safe?

Use Christmas tree light wire.  Cut each of the little colored lights off and twist the bare wire together to make a complete circuit.  Cover the twists with black electrician's tape for safety.  If you wish, just screw a screw into the light socket to complete the circuit and tape the exposed screw for safety purposes.  Strip the wire ends, attach the headphone plug ends by twisting the exposed copper wire together or solder with plumber's roll solder purchased at the local plumbing center.  Cover all exposed copper again with black electrician's tape for safety.  Don't try to cut the wires to make things look pretty.  Just take the wire, lumps, glumps and all.

Use of the wrong kind of solder.

No shielding or fancy teflon coatings.

Semi-exposed wire ends with no EMI/RFI rejection from the light connection ends.

Just plain old, cheap azzzzz, thousand mile spooled, coated, stranded pair, copper wire.

And probably the wrong wire gage ta boot.

I don't think it can get any more "terrible" then that.

Rant on.

Not meaning to come to Rick's defense but you guys need to get a grip on what it costs to run a viable business and turn a sufficient profit to make it through each and every continuing month.  This especially applies to any company catering to niche groups.  The point, enough with the; "You charge to much for your cables!", comments.  If you think the prices are a rip, don't buy em.  If you're not buying em, then you got no dog in the hunt to complain about.  The point, if you want to complain about a company's pricing structure, then you at least have to have bought their product.  If you haven't bought their product, then you got no room to complain.  And if you continue in your whining, you're just another internet bully, hiding behind a computer monitor, trolling for the express purpose of causing others harm; liable.

The prices I see on the web site link, are reasonable prices.  And if you don't like those prices, it's real simple, don't buy em and buy Monster headphone cables instead.  Oh wait, Monster doesn't make headphone cables unless for their Beats.  Or, you can keep using the cables that came with the headphones and be happy until the time arises where they need replacing and then one can choose to go OEM or DIY.  And for those who like making cables yourself so much and you think you've game, quit your day job and start a business like all the rest of us small business owners have.  Join the party.  Charge whatever you like.  Charge what you think to be a fair price for your product that will create interest and a sustaining profit and become Warren's competition.  And then, you too can pay your monthly household bills out of the profits.  Sans doing that, you're just another internet whiner.

Rant off.

I wish companies would stop making products that have such glaring and obvious weaknesses which are so easily solved!  I mean, if the improvements were so good, indeed worth the cost of entire headphones in-themselves, they could just swing their vastly higher purchasing power and scales of economy, labour cost, R&D, precision machining and tooling, and offer headphones with the best cables already as 'upgraded' models, or their own after-market upgrades.

Are you telling me that they've not thought about this?

Are you telling me it's more efficient for countless "little men" operations to do this that have to charge so much just to make it viable, than for the likes of Sennheiser, who could implement these improvements in such scales as to ameliorate the cost of entry by massively cutting these "viability" costs, thus lowering the barrier to entry thus increasing sales/aftermarket sales whilst maintaining profit margins.

I mean if all these super expensive tweaks amounted to jack, they'd do it.