Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Dilemma: Should I not believe any reviewers who talk about cables or just ignore that section of their review?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Dilemma: Should I not believe any reviewers who talk about cables or just ignore that section of... - Page 104

post #1546 of 1790
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joong View Post

Alas! when I changed from the 1meter long Western electric RCA cable (40 USD) to cheap and shorter (30cm)  RCA cable, SQ noticeably improved.

It is very obvious that the cost of the cable does not matter but the length of the cable does matter.

 

For this experiment, the common science stands and speaks.

In terms of impedance change, it must be negligible!!!!!

 

Next logical upgrade:

 

post #1547 of 1790

Takes a lot of force though to plug this into an RCA jack, but once it's in it holds the plug quite securely. Also, I've never heard such magical silence before.

post #1548 of 1790

Very informative is your statement!!!

 

For the load side of the system of change of devices which are the power, interconnections, and cable; the impedance of output must depend on the type of headphone.

The planar type of headphone like He-5les have lower inductance than HD650 which has motor coil in many uni-directional turns.

 

Therefore the planar type of headphones can be less dependent than dynamic phone in terms of reactance impact on SQ.

Because the capacitance does not impact the filter function on load-side frequency range.

 

I need to apply the common sense level thinking to this subtlety confused_face_2.gifdriven head-fier domain.

In this way I need to sort out the secondary from primary effect of engineering parameters on SQ.

 

Consequently leading to my money control for SQ pursuance.

 

Thanks xnorbiggrin.gif

post #1549 of 1790
Quote:
Originally Posted by anetode View Post

 

Next logical upgrade:

 

Thanks,

 

I did.

In this case I spend 30 USD for gold connector with 1 meter long from Comp to DAC.

post #1550 of 1790
Quote:
Originally Posted by xnor View Post

Takes a lot of force though to plug this into an RCA jack, but once it's in it holds the plug quite securely. Also, I've never heard such magical silence before.


Apparently I've grown dyslexic.

 

And now I give you, the Ultimate USB Cable:

 

post #1551 of 1790

In the larger scope, the filter system should include the electro- mechanical filter of my ear.

I do not understand the information channel from my outer ears to the ear-drum, which feeds to the transducer to deliver the acoustic energy to the brain as electric energy.

 

This part of the channel can generate some mystical dependence to the 2nd order or higher order quality.

post #1552 of 1790
Quote:
Originally Posted by xnor View Post

Takes a lot of force though to plug this into an RCA jack, but once it's in it holds the plug quite securely. Also, I've never heard such magical silence before.

The resistance does strongly depends on the pressure, the area, and the depth / softness of oxidation layer.

It is not necessarily the gold interface.

 

I totally agree on that whenever tight engagement has been done it must be OK regardless of the cost of the cables.

post #1553 of 1790

anetode, a good rule of thumb is that if the interconnect cannot lift your amp it's way too flimsy.

 

Kidding, of course.

 

 

Joong, I don't think "the impedance of output must depend on the type of headphone", but maybe I misunderstood you. The general rule is an output impedance of 1/8th or 1/10th of the headphones' impedance, so even if your cable had 1 Ohm you'd still be fine with a 2 Ohm amp and 30+ Ohm headphones as load.


Edited by xnor - 5/5/13 at 1:36pm
post #1554 of 1790

I see. thanks.

post #1555 of 1790
Quote:
Originally Posted by DNZGamer View Post

Ever since I got linked to that whole "cables" topic and read the ridiculous number of sources repeating that from basically regular listeners all the way to top audio engineers and reviewers could not distinguish cables in blind testing, I have been highly conflicted about reviews on this site.


Recently just read a review about another IEM and in it, the cables are being mentioned as enhancing the bass, helping with soundstage and imaging. Sounds like a big difference...

 

But these are $200 cables while audio professionals can't tell the difference between $10 cables and $1000 cables or even coat hangers in the most extreme case...

 

So then should I believe the rest of what these people say or is it just as likely to be as inaccurate? Or do cables still make a difference beyond just peoples imaginations?

 

The dilemma here is that if I was to take these reviewers seriously, it would mean that I believe in cables making a difference despite all the empirical and scientific findings... If I don't believe that cables make a difference, then I am assuming they are talking out of their ass when it comes to sound and that anything they say is probably worthless!

 

Someone tell me what to believe and make it simple!

 "...audio professionals can't tell the difference between $10 cables and $1000 cables or even coat hangers in the most extreme case..."

That assertion is a silly urban legend. This 'talk' is an interesting one - http://www.audioquest.com/pdfs/aq_cable_theory.pdf

Edited by zorin - 5/14/13 at 11:43am
post #1556 of 1790
Quote:
Originally Posted by zorin View Post

 "...audio professionals can't tell the difference between $10 cables and $1000 cables or even coat hangers in the most extreme case..."

That assertion is a silly urban legend. This 'talk' is an interesting one - http://www.audioquest.com/pdfs/aq_cable_theory.pdf

 

Seems very long on words and ideas, but scant on details.  For all the talk of added distortion, potential pitfalls, etc., any reason for the complete avoidance of throwing out figures for how much distortion (in audio band) is created due to things like skin effect, dialectrics absorbing miniscule parts of the signal, and so on?  Some grasps and wishful thinking too, it seems.

 

 

Quote:
Directionality: All cables are directional, from hardware store electrical cable to the finest pure silver cables. All AudioQuest cables are marked for direction. With other cables it might be necessary to simply listen to the cables in one direction and then the other. The difference will be clear-in the correct direction the music is more relaxed, pleasant and believable. While cable directionality is not fully understood, it is clear that the molecular structure of drawn metal is not symmetrical, providing a physical explanation for the existence of directionality.

 

 

Quote:
• As for comparisons where there seem to be only “insignificant” differences between components, this is usually proof of a faulty context and/or methodology. This is most obvious in the discussion of ABX testing.
 
In an ABX set-up, the listener does not know whether or not there has been any equipment change at all. ABX testing is not a question of how a fixed but blind “A” compares to a fixed but blind “B”. Because there are too many unknowns, the ABX test becomes primarily an opportunity for embarrassment. Context is everything, and the ABX set-up is one very distorted context, much too far removed from the purpose of an audio system. ABX fans believe that a lack of repeatable hierarchy proves there are no valid differences. Others of us believe the same evidence proves that the ABX test is an invalid methodology.

Edited by mikeaj - 5/14/13 at 11:59am
post #1557 of 1790
Quote:
Originally Posted by zorin View Post

 "...audio professionals can't tell the difference between $10 cables and $1000 cables or even coat hangers in the most extreme case..."

That assertion is a silly urban legend. This 'talk' is an interesting one - http://www.audioquest.com/pdfs/aq_cable_theory.pdf

Interesting, yes.  But for all the claims, there are no specifics, no quantities.

 

If a cable causes distortion of any kind, how much, how long, what parameters...nothing was offered.  

 

The directional thing...ok, but audio is bi-directional.  Everything about that signal in the wire is going both ways all the time.

 

But you can ignore all of the claims, because there's been no proof supplied, just a lot of verbiage. On the other hand, those that have actually conducted ABX tests on cable do seem to support the silly urban legend.

post #1558 of 1790

"Material Quality: It's visible. It's explainable. It's audible."

 

 

Oh and of course they reject ABX/blind tests, or reject results that don't confirm their expectations anyway which isn't so different from rejecting blind tests altogether, if you think about it.


Edited by xnor - 5/14/13 at 2:12pm
post #1559 of 1790

Sure, we're a bunch of crotchety skeptics.  But all we really ask is, if a product or item provides a benefit, that benefit should be clearly identifiable as a difference in a double-blind test.  If not, there's reasonable doubt that it is of any benefit.  

post #1560 of 1790
...coathangers
Quote:
Originally Posted by zorin View Post

......
That assertion is a silly urban legend.

It's not really an urban legend but has been referenced so many times without its origin being linked that the original 2004 description of the event gets obfuscated. It can be found at http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/general-av-discussions/2512-speakers%3B-when-good-enough-enough-3.html#post15412

It's a test that could be repeated by anyone conducting a similar blind test. Being so extreme it's quite an interesting comparison. If it could be reliably performed with the same result then that is the "I hear cables" position torpedoed and sunk with no survivors, so people who put some effort into dismissing cable theory ought to be interested. And any manufacturer or vendor who has even an atom of confidence in their products should be completely unafraid to put their product up against a coathanger.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Dilemma: Should I not believe any reviewers who talk about cables or just ignore that section of their review?