[scootermafia]

It's plain and simple that the stock HD650 cable wire an an example of stock cable wire (30+ gauge enameled ofc) does not sound as good as 24 gauge OCC copper. I wouldn't have bought thousands of meters of the stuff if it didn't bring a smile to my face. No machine can tell the complete picture on this, your ears can interpret sound differently than any machine. I'm pretty distrustful of potential placebo effects and I don't buy or make things just to entertain my eyes and mind, it didn't take long for me to have these feelings regarding occ copper wire but it did take a while to become 100% certain of it.

My point is that the recable will sound better and better, the more of the stock wire you remove. This wire is put there for its compactness, cheapness, and ease of rapid assembly. It's not easy or quick to dink around 24 gauge PE insulated wire inside the earcups.

PE or teflon insulation has a lower coefficient than whatever plasticy stuff is on stock wire, OCC copper is more pure than OFC from chemical and structural analysis, 24 gauge in terms of size is a popular sweet spot being not too big or too small for interconnect/headphone wiring, and the stranding is very fine (in theory, stranded wire sounds closer to solidcore the finer the stranding). It's not simply for looks. I don't have the means to provide hard physical data for this, but people have been enjoying OCC copper for a long time, including people that have no stake in whether the copper is evaluated favorably or not. In any case, it's not an expensive mod to replace all the internal wiring in the SRH840. Buy up about 4 feet of Lee's Cryoparts TWCu copper and give it a shot anyone that's curious, for $30 it's more fun than a trip to the Outback Steakhouse.

Try at a meet whatever you consider to be the best, most acclaimed headphone upgrade cable, vs. a stock HD800 or HD650 cable. If you really hear no difference, then you really are not a cable believer. Regardless of what numbers a machine can provide, it's very obvious to the ears.

It is very possible that the quality of the insulation and the wire not being as horribly small (32 gauge) is more important than OCC copper, however I didn't start hearing what I liked from HD650s until I started screwing around with some inexpensive Neotech 24 gauge occ.

 

[scootermafia]

*waits for the wire & plug nerds to arrive* c'mon guys...

 

[markop2003]

Theoretically the less low quliaty cable and the more high quality cable you use the better the quality.

Though personally i don't think the issue hear is whther it'll actually provide better sound quality. Sounds like you're just doing it for the hell of it, in which case the only question is "could the money be used elsewhere?" if no then go ahead, if yes then use it on the other item first then mod them when you get some spare cash. It's not like you're going to diminish the quality.

 

[Steve Eddy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by scootermafia /img/forum/go_quote.gif No machine can tell the complete picture on this, your ears can interpret sound differently than any machine.

First, it's not our ears that interpret sound, it's our brain. And it has to do a fair amount of interpretation and interpolation because our ears throw out a fair amount of information.

And the issue isn't interpretation, but rather actual audible differences. In order for there to be an actual audible difference, there must be some physical difference to produce it in the first place. And we can measure physical differences to levels well below our ability to hear.

In the electrical domain, all you have are changes in voltage and current over time. In order for something such as a cable to produce an actual audible difference, there must also be some difference in the changes in voltage and current over time between the two elements producing the audible difference.

Quote:

PE or teflon insulation has a lower coefficient than whatever plasticy stuff is on stock wire...

And what exactly is the consequence of this? Or is it nothing more than a number's game?

Quote:

...OCC copper is more pure than OFC from chemical and structural analysis...

First, as I said elsewhere, the Ohno continuous cast process has absolutely nothing to do with purity. It is a casting process, not a refining process.

Second, OFC is commonly available certified to 99.9999%. Someone posted some blurb about "ultra pure" OCC (UP-OCC) which only claimed 99.9998% purity.

And third I should mention that the OCC process has nothing to do with the electrical properties of the wire.

Quote:

I don't have the means to provide hard physical data for this, but people have been enjoying OCC copper for a long time, including people that have no stake in whether the copper is evaluated favorably or not.

Don't have to have a stake in anything to simply be human.

se

 

[colonelkernel8]

Quote:

Originally Posted by scootermafia /img/forum/go_quote.gif No machine can tell the complete picture on this, your ears can interpret sound differently than any machine.

Wrong again. An oscilloscope or a spectrum analyzer is thousands of times more sensitive than a human ear. If the signal going from point A to point B is the same regardless of the cable, then there can be no audible difference because the signal is the same.

I find it humorous when people like to believe that the ear is some sort of magical organ capable of earing the impossible...

 

[scootermafia]

Wonder why I like the sound, then. It isn't my imagination. Maybe I'm a cable "hedonist" in Koyaan's terms. Neotech claims that the OCC process removes more impurities than the process of making typical OFC, so that's what I'm going off of, I realize it is not a purification process but a casting process specifically.

 

[IPodPJ]

And what about crosstalk? That's the only logical explanation I can claim with different cables I've tried.

 

[scootermafia]

Yep, that may trump everything. If left/right even mix at all, then you're not hearing what the original recording contains precisely.

 

[Steve Eddy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by scootermafia /img/forum/go_quote.gif Wonder why I like the sound, then. It isn't my imagination.

And you now this how exactly?

Quote:

Maybe I'm a cable "hedonist" in Koyaan's terms.

If you're not, you should be. It's very liberating.

Quote:

Neotech claims that the OCC process removes more impurities than the process of making typical OFC, so that's what I'm going off of, I realize it is not a purification process but a casting process specifically.

Neotech is being less than honest.

In their copper comparison chart, for purity they list OCC as "99.99998%" and OFC as "99.99%."

99.99% is simply the minimum purity required to meet the C101 alloy spec. It doesn't reflect the purity of the OFC wire that's actually being produced.

About five years ago, I contacted Phelps Doge (now owned by Freeport-McMoRan) regarding the purity of their C101 OFC wire. It was certified 99.9999%.

Sure, OCC has fewer crystals than regular continuous cast copper. But that just doesn't have any real relevance to the wire's electrical properties, nor was the OCC process developed to improve any electrical properties. Just read Ohno's patent (4,665,970). It was only developed to improve issues having do with with the casting process.

se

 

[IPodPJ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Koyaan I. Sqatsi /img/forum/go_quote.gif Just read Ohno's patent (4,665,970). It was only developed to improve issues having do with with the casting process. se

Just because something was developed for one thing does not mean it won't have benefits for something else.

A toothpick was made to dislodge food chunks from your teeth. But it is also used on party food sampler trays as a lifting device for the small snacks.

 

[Steve Eddy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by scootermafia /img/forum/go_quote.gif Yep, that may trump everything. If left/right even mix at all, then you're not hearing what the original recording contains precisely.

First, that presupposes that the crosstalk is sufficient to be audible.

Second, is the goal really to hear what the original recording contains precisely?

I mean, to begin with, with regard to the vast majority of recordings out there, they were made with reproduction via loudspeakers foremost in mind.

Further, no recording has ever been made under objectively perfect conditions. So the recording is manipulated to get the best results using the non-perfect equipment used to make the recording.

What that means is that what the recording actually contains is not only the music that was recorded, but essentially the inverse transform of the non-ideal equipment used.

Let's say for example that a recording was made with a microphone that was a bit peaky in the midrange.

To compensate for this, the engineer might use a little EQ to smooth out the peak.

Well, if you listen to this on a "perfect" playback system, what you'll end up with is a dip in the midrange. To hear it as intended, you'd need to listen on something that had a similar peaky midrange.

So again, is the goal really to hear what the original recording contains precisely?

se

 

[Steve Eddy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by IPodPJ /img/forum/go_quote.gif Just because something was developed for one thing does not mean it won't have benefits for something else. A toothpick was made to dislodge food chunks from your teeth. But it is also used on party food sampler trays as a lifting device for the small snacks.

That's irrelevant in this case as regardless what Ohno's intents were, his casting process has nothing to do with the electrical properties of the wire.

se

 

[anetode]

Quote:

Originally Posted by scootermafia /img/forum/go_quote.gif Yep, that may trump everything. If left/right even mix at all, then you're not hearing what the original recording contains precisely.

Most recordings aren't binaural, the left and right channels are supposed to mix to create a coherent stereo image.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Koyaan I. Sqatsi /img/forum/go_quote.gif And the issue isn't interpretation, but rather actual audible differences. In order for there to be an actual audible difference, there must be some physical difference to produce it in the first place.

I'm afraid that interpretation is indeed the issue. You don't really need any physical stimulus to make something audible, you can verify this by staying awake for a week. That's why arguments about the electrical properties of cables continually fail to settle these debates.

The placebo effect is not an ethereal quality, it's physical manifestation can be explained by changes in neurochemistry and the resultant patterns of electrical activity.(sauce) I'd like to see a study that uses fMRI to monitor activity during listening sessions during dbt and open sessions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by scootermafia /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm pretty distrustful of potential placebo effects and I don't buy or make things just to entertain my eyes and mind, it didn't take long for me to have these feelings regarding occ copper wire but it did take a while to become 100% certain of it.

Ah, love. The attraction, the trepidation and finally the commitment to copper worship

 

[Happy Camper]

I'm betting he hears a difference.

If you can change the sound coming into the internal wiring, it will pass it along. Senn re-cables make a difference in sound.

 

[Steve Eddy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Happy Camper /img/forum/go_quote.gif If you can change the sound coming into the internal wiring, it will pass it along.

Sure. But first you have to change it.

se