or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Audiophile cables, an interesting question.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Audiophile cables, an interesting question. - Page 34

post #496 of 1186
Quote:
Originally Posted by herbie12389 View Post
 

I dont understand how I could be more narrow minded when I'm open to the exposure of all sorts of equipment to achieve what I feel is a more hi fi system for me. I really don't mean to give the impression that I'm trolling. No one benifits or learns anything from that. Still just sharing my opinion on what cables have done for me. The reason why this post started. Take a look at my post count. Clearly new to the whole forum thing and have without a doubt posted in the wrong section, but the topic of cables caught my eye so I posted my accounts without reallllly reading into where I was posting. I have some solid years of experience in the hobby and am very lucky to work where I do to be exposed to such cool stuff all the time. I went to school for music, I judge things by sound and what I hear, doenst make me a pro with golden ears, its just how I think when it comes to audio equipment. 


But see your cables didn't do anything for you.  I know you heard it, I have heard it too.  But you know what, the signal didn't change, nor did the sound even though you perceived it differently.  That is what psycho-acoustics investigates among other things.  The electronics, signal-theory side of it informs us about what is really going on to a large extent.  It is advanced enough to show that wires didn't change your sound.  Since you did hear it differently you will have to look further into why that was.  It wasn't the cable, the material, the insulation or any of that.  It simply wasn't.  I am not just saying that being close minded.  It is what the physics of the situation confirmed by experiment and correct prediction of results show.  Though you perceived a difference you couldn't physically hear something that did not change.

 

Do you care to learn why that occurs and under what circumstances?  To learn why your ears alone cannot be trusted implicitly?  Yes, yes I know how confident and certain your experience was.  Yet it was mistaken.  Very comfortable to simply accept the raw experience and difficult to reject that as mistaken, but until you do you are the one boxed in and confined.


Edited by esldude - 4/17/14 at 3:23pm
post #497 of 1186
Quote:
Originally Posted by herbie12389 View Post

I dont understand how I could be more narrow minded when I'm open to the exposure of all sorts of equipment to achieve what I feel is a more hi fi system for me.

"High fidelity" means that sound reproduction comes very close to being true to the original. Solid state electronics and digital audio have gone a step further to "perfect sound". Tubes and analogue can get close to being a true copy of the original. Solid state and digtial audio *are* a true copy.

I started out in the 70s as a hifi nut. Back then, everything was imperfect, and everything was a compromise. Today, with perfect sound I don't need to worry about equipment having its own sound, or music not being a completely accurate transcription. It's liberating. I can focus on other things that matter a lot more, like multichannel sound, signal processing and room acoustics. Those areas allow me to create a system that blows away anything from the past.

I'd never go back to the 70s. Everything I dreamed about back then has come true... and a lot more that I couldn't even dream of. I can't wait to find out what comes next. I think I know what that is, and it would be really cool.
post #498 of 1186
Quote:
Originally Posted by herbie12389 View Post
 

That takes the point of an opinion away... 


This is a science based forum - the only one on this board.  Facts and supportable theory are the basis for discussions, not uninformed opinions.

 

Edit:  ESLdude beat me to it.


Edited by bfreedma - 4/17/14 at 3:29pm
post #499 of 1186

I'm not claiming the signal changed... The path from which it travels on from a to b does have variance in it. 

post #500 of 1186
Quote:
Originally Posted by bfreedma View Post
 


This is a science based forum - the only one on this board.  Facts and supportable theory are the basis for discussions, not uninformed opinions.


Edited by herbie12389 - 4/17/14 at 11:10pm
post #501 of 1186
Quote:
Originally Posted by herbie12389 View Post
 

I'm not claiming the signal changed... The path from which it travels on from a to b does have variance in it. 


No, it doesn't. Not in any audible way.  Unless you were using strange equipment with strange impedance values.  Even then the change is simple LCR effects, not related to conductor material.  Now if the signal exiting the cable is not different how would it sound different?

post #502 of 1186
Quote:
Originally Posted by esldude View Post
 


No, it doesn't. Not in any audible way.  Unless you were using strange equipment with strange impedance values.  Even then the change is simple LCR effects, not related to conductor material.  Now if the signal exiting the cable is not different how would it sound different?

.


Edited by herbie12389 - 4/17/14 at 10:28pm
post #503 of 1186
Quote:
Originally Posted by herbie12389 View Post
 

It just does man. Hahaha. Ive been testing this all day while on the forums at work. I gotta get my ears checked I guess. lol

 

Ive used everything from radio shack to parts express wire with all sorts of gauges. Cardas, snake river, audionote, xlo, dana, audience, supra, krystal cable, monster, NBS, Shunyata.... The free stuff that comes with sonos players... Im running out here. Dude I'm trying so hard to get it.


So much snake oil to sell and so little time...

post #504 of 1186

Not a fan of Snake River if that's what you are referring to. Overpriced for what it is. Hahaha. 

post #505 of 1186
Quote:
Originally Posted by herbie12389 View Post

Overpriced for what it is. Hahaha. 

Aren't they all? Hahaha.
post #506 of 1186

Nah dude they aren't. Some are deff gimmicks and illusions, others are great tools in a system. 

post #507 of 1186
Quote:
Originally Posted by herbie12389 View Post
 

Nah dude they aren't. Some are deff gimmicks and illusions, others are great tools in a system. 

Not tools, components. 

post #508 of 1186
You don't have any interest at all in learning about things you might be clueless on. You're just here to strut your ego and enter into pointless back and forth over ignorant opinions with no basis in fact. What a waste of time.
post #509 of 1186
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post

You don't have any interest at all in learning about things you might be clueless on. You're just here to strut your ego and enter into pointless back and forth over ignorant opinions with no basis in fact. What a waste of time.

.


Edited by herbie12389 - 4/17/14 at 10:27pm
post #510 of 1186
Quote:
Originally Posted by herbie12389 View Post

They aren't ignorant opinions, when you and I base our opinion on a difference set of facts. One proven on paper and the other through practice in use of actual audio equipment.

What does "use of actual audio equipment" involve? Turning on the power and listening to a record? Because if that is experience, I'm about the most experienced person in the world. I have hundreds of thousands of hours logged doing that.

The trick to getting the useful answers is asking the right questions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by herbie12389 View Post

Any suggestions as to what I should try next at work?

Ooo! That's easy to answer! I suggest you try controlled testing techniques... blind tests, level matching, a/b switching... the works.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Audiophile cables, an interesting question.