[CrewCall]

Sounds good to me

 

[CrewCall]

Great Stuff !

 

[beeman458]

Prog Rock Man wrote:
 
No, my biggest audio gap is never having heard any high end headphones.
 
Then I will consider myself both fortunate and spoiled.  As encouragement, the sooner you can get your high end headphones, the better your listening experience.

 

[Shike]

Quote:

No, my biggest audio gap is never having heard any high end headphones. Even though where I live has a very good supply of hifi shops, none stock high end. I would be loathed to ask one to get me something I have no intention (money) of getting at the moment. However, I have a ready supply of auditionable mid to low end headphones, so I have gone the route of multi ownership as opposed to one high end. Then there is my vintage collection.
 
I don't worry that I am missing out as one day I will have the spare cash and will own something special, the K1000 being top of the wish list.

There's nothing wrong with the K702 honestly, it rolls off a bit quick but offers low distortion and good FR for the most part (not to mention good transient response and decay).

 

[Prog Rock Man]

 
Quote:

Prog Rock Man wrote:
 
No, my biggest audio gap is never having heard any high end headphones.
 
Then I will consider myself both fortunate and spoiled.  As encouragement, the sooner you can get your high end headphones, the better your listening experience.

Back at you! The sooner you get yourself a little collection you too can be fortunate and spoiled like me

 

[Prog Rock Man]

 
Quote:

Quote:

No, my biggest audio gap is never having heard any high end headphones. Even though where I live has a very good supply of hifi shops, none stock high end. I would be loathed to ask one to get me something I have no intention (money) of getting at the moment. However, I have a ready supply of auditionable mid to low end headphones, so I have gone the route of multi ownership as opposed to one high end. Then there is my vintage collection.
 
I don't worry that I am missing out as one day I will have the spare cash and will own something special, the K1000 being top of the wish list.

There's nothing wrong with the K702 honestly, it rolls off a bit quick but offers low distortion and good FR for the most part (not to mention good transient response and decay).

I now prefer my K280 parabolic vintage headphones to the K702 as they have a bit more bass response and can do amazing things with stereo/sound affects. I am working on diminishing returns that beyond the K702/K280 (a similar price in its day) I will not get a huge amount more.
 
Whatever high end headphone I get, it will be likely second hand which will ease the finances. I saw some Sennheiser Charlestons on ebay recently and if I had £400 to spare would have snapped them up.

 

[Shike]

 
 
Quote:

 

I now prefer my K280 parabolic vintage headphones to the K702 as they have a bit more bass response and can do amazing things with stereo/sound affects. I am working on diminishing returns that beyond the K702/K280 (a similar price in its day) I will not get a huge amount more.
 
Arguably you may not get ANY more, in fact you could very well get worse in terms of signal accuracy.
 
Whatever high end headphone I get, it will be likely second hand which will ease the finances. I saw some Sennheiser Charlestons on ebay recently and if I had £400 to spare would have snapped them up.
 
I'd do the same, but not because they measure good or sound great subjectively (they probably do), but because they look beautiful

Responses in bold

 

[Prog Rock Man]

My eyes tell me that the Charlestones will sound spectacularly good

 

[beeman458]

Back at you! The sooner you get yourself a little collection you too can be fortunate and spoiled like me

 
Consider me fortunate and spoiled.

 

[alexxfloo]

So the conclusion is... cables don't matter. Closed subject!

 

[mike1127]

Quote:

 
Now for digitabl cables. To be or not to be, this is the FACT for digital cables. There is no better signal. 0 and 1's are the same they can't be 0.9999 or 0.001.
 

 
The answer to this is that it's a model. Reality is infamous for not conforming to our models of it. Some engineers seem to believe that there models are reality itself. I will not try to change their minds because I think they are missing the obvious and there's nothing I can say.

 

[Shike]

 
Quote:

 
The answer to this is that it's a model. Reality is infamous for not conforming to our models of it. Some engineers seem to believe that there models are reality itself. I will not try to change their minds because I think they are missing the obvious and there's nothing I can say.

You also don't have evidence contrary or the hardware to measure your claims whereas the models are usually backed with evidence.  I have yet to see a cable drastically effect jitter - which is the only argument beyond ones and zeros.

 

[Ceja-Blu]

Thanks for clarifying.   I  couldn't agree more.

 

[Albedo]

In theory there is the notion of absolute vacuum, in real life there's no such thing, does almost equals zero?
 
Cable tweaks are minuscule, but so also is the ratio of people with absolute pitch (one out of ten thousand) and educated settled adults hearing high frequencies (17 kHz and beyond). I'm not saying that I've got AP and can hear a bat at night searching for food..
 
.. but this sounds right to me:
 
 
Jenving Technology AB:

Simplistic electronics theory says there is no ‘directionality’ in conductors, but assumes conductors are perfectly isomorphic. It also ignores the inherently directional nature of signal and energy flow. Yet electricity could not be sold without ‘energy flow directionality’. [-1-] In reality, practical conductors are drawn many times - not cast. This creates highly elongated crystal structures. This in turn creates a physical (mechanical) directional feature or ‘axial polarity’. Annealing and also ‘burning-in’ processes can reduce the ‘strength’ of the ‘drawing imprint’, but only to a degree.
-
Second, the ‘directionality’ of conductors is now able to be measured, and Supra cables are the first in the world to benefit from a spectral technique developed by audio consultant Ben Duncan [-2-] in conjunction with Jenving Technology AB. This employs some special test conditions which better approximate audio equipment’s real-world usage than standard, pure signal sources. Test results show typical increases in harmonic (noise) levels 0.5dB when cables are connected so the conductors’ drawn direction opposes the signal flow direction. In real use the noise difference, which is some dB below the main signal, could be much greater. From this, a reduction in such noise (‘more clarity’) is what’s expected, and it is also one of the things that is heard in practice - when optimum conductor orientation is discovered.
 
In ‘high-end’ audio, ‘Directionality’ means: ‘a cable used for audio signal transmission offering better sound quality (in various ways) when connected a particular way round.’ To those sensitive to the sonic changes, this is repeatable, over spans of time, or in different systems. In other cases, if the less good direction were chosen, it too may approach the preferred direction after burn-in, i.e. a period of use, simple ageing, or even cryogenic treatment. Such ‘burn-in’ processes involve annealing of the metal.
 
Some pundits say that 'directionality' (in cables) can be heard even on the low quality 'curvy plastic' low/ mid-fi audio equipment sold in high-street shops. On a higher vestor, a U.S. high-end enthusiast/ researcher. Doug Blackburn, suggests it is possible that when audiophiles say they hear sonic changes after changing polarity (by swapping conductors at one point - not swapping ends as with conventional directionality#) that they've actually heard directionality instead. That's because purely digital ('software') polarity reversals mysteriously don't have the sonic attributes associated with analogue signal polarity reversal.
 
#Here, directionality effect being heard is in the connected parts (eg. long inductor wires), rather than in the preceding connective conductor.
 
[-1-] For background, refer to extensive insights in 'Black Box' column, by Ben Duncan, originally in Hi-Fi News & Record Review, reprinted 73 part compendium 1994 - 2000 available from: http://www.hifiaccessoriesclub.com or http://www.proaudioaccessories.com
 
[-2-] Ben Duncan Research: http://www.benduncanresearch.com

 
I have to add that in this case I'm somewhat biased as I own two interconnections from this firm each measuring 1 feet, buying them for my passive preamplifier as I bought into his statement that:
 
 
Jenving Technology AB:

A good interconnect must have low capacitance and low skin-effect.
 
The skin-effect has a dynamic and noticeable influence because an audio signal is nothing but variations of frequencies and sound levels. If we were to transfer only one stable frequency the skin-effect would not be any problem. The frequencies push the signal differently far out from the center of the conductor. High frequencies travel on the surface whereas low frequencies travel inside the conductor.
 
Thus the higher the frequency, the higher the resistance. 

 
So, what do you OP have to say about this, is he a con artist and should I sue him for fraud as he (in my layman understanding of electronic) has clearly stated/ are stating some laws of physics that can be refuted?

 

[lawlbear]

I read, i regret it. Jk nice post.