Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Cable Science
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Cable Science - Page 2

post #16 of 122
Thread Starter 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prog Rock Man View Post

Worth highlighting!

 

For cables to cause sound quality differences are we looking for a new property no one has yet found, or the actions of an exisiting known property?

 

It seems to be that we have ruled out the existing known properties of cables even if it just be the lack of consitency between property and affect on sound quality. Would it not be brilliant if lowering the capacitance increased the treble?!!!

 

So we are looking for a new property. And it is not even as if we are at the stage of the first suggestion of the Higgs Boson, we have not even got that far, in 40 years of audiophile 'cable science'.


I hear you, "cable science" is far from that.  It's little understood I suspect, and if at all there's any science behind it--it's obviously not known science.  That's the gist of what I'm saying.  

post #17 of 122
Thread Starter 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trasselkalle View Post

I'm all for quantitative measurements, but they simply do not capture everything that our brains register. 


+1

 

post #18 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by Head Injury View Post


Anything that doesn't rely on the human ear, for one.

 

I'm just afraid the LHC is going to open up a massive black hole because they didn't use much more accurate Pear Cables.



Could be worse, they could be using the ones that offer "quantum tunneling" - a guaranteed black hole :p

post #19 of 122
Thread Starter 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Head Injury View Post


Anything that doesn't rely on the human ear, for one.


That's exactly what I was getting at.  Not many care whether a cable might increase the efficiency of an air conditioner by 1/2%.  (Just a hypothetical example.)


Edited by sphinxvc - 8/4/11 at 1:58pm
post #20 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by sphinxvc View Post

That's exactly what I was getting at.  Not many care whether a cable might increase the efficiency of an air conditioner by 1/2%.  (Just a hypothetical example.)


But many more care about safe, reliable energy in scientific and medical applications. If there was an as-of-yet undiscovered electrical property that alters the electrical signal, there is a lot of very sensitive equipment which could be jeopardy. Equipment on which lives depend. Where performance matters far more than audio.

post #21 of 122
Thread Starter 

Agreed.  But the ear and brain aren't the same as an air conditioner.  I was hoping for a better example from one of you.  The air conditioner, or medical devices, or any such device would be engineered based on the same understanding of properties we have for cables.  If you use a ruler/scale to measure a 1 foot line, draw the line then measure it with the same ruler, you will get the same measurement: 1 foot.


Edited by sphinxvc - 8/4/11 at 2:08pm
post #22 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by sphinxvc View Post

Agreed.  But the ear and brain aren't the same as an air conditioner.  I was hoping for a better example from one of you.  The air conditioner, or medical devices, or any such device would be engineered based on the same understanding of properties we have for cables.  If you use a ruler/scale to measure a 1 foot line, draw the line then measure it with the same ruler, you will get the same measurement: 1 foot.


But this has as a premise that the human brain/ear are going to be more sensitive than some equipment and there's really nothing that proves that's the case. We're able to hear a certain range of frequencies. There are other animals, not to mention equipment that can register outside that range. Why should there be something special about the human nervous system that makes current understanding of physics and neurobiology (not to mention psychology) irrelevant?
post #23 of 122

sphinxvc, you are correct that undiscovered properties of such cables cannot be conclusively ruled out no matter how well the theories we currently have hold together.  I admit that and anyone who is intellectually honest should admit the possibility as well.

 

The real question is how likely it is that such properties actually exist.  The weight of the evidence suggests its not likely at all.  Of course everyone is free to think that they may exist or do exist and to try and discover and quantify these unknown properties.  I think its as likely as discovering real live gnomes, but if someone demonstrates I'm wrong I will happily change my mind.  I'd love to be able to make my headphones sound better with something as simple as a recable.  I'll shell out for fancy wire and sing its praises as soon as someone shows me it actually works.

 

What I (and I think most skeptics) have a problem with is the people who sell such things as if these properties had already been discovered.  Some retailers cross over the line into blatant fraud, but most rely on placebo induced testimonials in the usual manner of "alternative" medicine.  That's not as bad but its still far from honest.  If they were just sold for reasons like looks, ergonomics, or status I wouldn't have have much issue with it.  The problem is that they usually directly or indirectly make objective claims which they have not demonstrated to be true.

post #24 of 122

But they are engineered based on the same properties we have for cables. You're making a rather bold claim in suggesting that there is something indescribable in current understanding of how electricity works that just so happens to only show up in the frequency range we care about for listening to music, specific examples would include literally everything else that uses electricity. So it's a bit reversed, isn't it? Shouldn't the question be "why would there be some mystery property unknown to science that would alter our understanding of electrodynamics, but only in the range that in which music is made?" That seems like a much more specific and testable question than your request, which can be restated (unflatteringly, and I apologize for that, but hear me out) as:

 

"give me examples of how my mystery property, which I admit I do not know anything about because it is a mystery, should affect everything else and yet does not."

 

You can probably see that I'm a bit skeptical here.

post #25 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by sphinxvc View Post

The air conditioner, or medical devices, or any such device would be engineered based on the same understanding of properties we have for cables.


So are headphones. Ever wonder why headphone companies don't supply fancy cables with their headphones? Especially the flagships? If the engineers thought better cables would make the flagships perform better, they would include them and up the price $100 or something.

post #26 of 122

I readily agree with shifty sales arguments being shoved down one's throat is annoying beyond words. That alone usually makes me despise a product (like the Mac, in my case).

 

We seem to be mixing aspects that are discussed however. One argument for there possibly being an impact from re-cabling is that there haven't been any tests that are good enough to be able to capture any sort of conclusive evidence, and that we therefore don't know if this is the case or not. The other argument is that there may be elements in electronics not captured by current measurements. While I agree that we appear quite solid in our understanding of electronics, I actually haven't seen any counter-arguments regarding the effects of braiding, shielding, etc other than based on the far from conclusive A/B and ABX tests. Did I miss some posts? Furthermore, do we have all the measurements we need to cover all sound qualities?


Edited by Trasselkalle - 8/4/11 at 3:09pm
post #27 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by Head Injury View Post


So are headphones. Ever wonder why headphone companies don't supply fancy cables with their headphones? Especially the flagships? If the engineers thought better cables would make the flagships perform better, they would include them and up the price $100 or something.



I completely agree with this. The Ultrasone Palladium's are well north of $1,000. The makers of this headphone, I am certain, have put lots of hours into research and development before actually manufacturing it.  You really think with all that they do with that, they skimped on the cable that came with it? I highly doubt it. I am sure the cable that came with it, is more than sufficient, and there is no need for you to recable it with one that costs almost as much as the headphone itself. 

post #28 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by sphinxvc View Post

I first heard it on Star Trek.  smile.gif

 

Yeah, I seem to recall Spock saying that.

 

But it's a classic Sherlock Holmes quote.

 

se

post #29 of 122

I don't think so. the main concern of flagships companies (and most businesses) is to sale and make a profit in order to continue and grow. how many headphones do you think would they sell where the cable would be half the cost? not that many for them to even consider it, imo. besides there's nothing wrong with the stock cable. it's up to the individual who likes what they hear from their headphones, and want to hear it even better, then maybe they should try better cables.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tmars78 View Post





I completely agree with this. The Ultrasone Palladium's are well north of $1,000. The makers of this headphone, I am certain, have put lots of hours into research and development before actually manufacturing it.  You really think with all that they do with that, they skimped on the cable that came with it? I highly doubt it. I am sure the cable that came with it, is more than sufficient, and there is no need for you to recable it with one that costs almost as much as the headphone itself. 



 

post #30 of 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lenni View Post

I don't think so. the main concern of flagships companies (and most businesses) is to sale and make a profit in order to continue and grow. how many headphones do you think would they sell where the cable would be half the cost? not that many for them to even consider it, imo. besides there's nothing wrong with the stock cable. it's up to the individual who likes what they hear from their headphones, and want to hear it even better, then maybe they should try better cables.


The markup for flagship headphones is huge as it is. The markup for high-end cables is worse. They could build a cable that would retail for $1,000 with $100 of materials and man hours then increase the headphone's price by $200. There, more profit. Do you really think audiophiles would so much as blink at a $1,600 HD800 instead of a $1,400 one? If there's no other option, they'll buy it anyway.

 

Why would they spend so much money on research and development to get the driver and housing just right, then skimp on the cable?

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Cable Science