[ILikeMusic]

I haven't had a lot of experience comparing $5 cables to $500 cables but I have had a lot of (life) experience demonstrate to me that my purely subjective impressions and senses are sometimes the very last thing I should trust.

There are many different kinds of 'experience.'

 

[linuxworks]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheAttorney /img/forum/go_quote.gif So I'm curious to know if such people are completely satisfied with the sound quality of these components and have therefore successfully controlled "upgradeitis". Do you fall into one of these camps:

my systems are semi modest.

that said, the weak spot is almost always the source material, not even the channel its embedded in (cd, etc).

even with a $300 mid-grade total cost system, the source is STILL the limiting factor.

once I 'got' that fact, I became a bit less neurotic (just a bit, lol) in search for audio perfection.

AP does not exist. it can't exist in any playback system. at some point you are only splitting hairs.

I don't go crazy over the final .1%. I used to, but I got over that insanity

 

[moogoob]

Quote:

Originally Posted by CodeToad /img/forum/go_quote.gif Wouldn't the best cable be another pcb with the same material used for the other circuit boards to transfer from one circuit board to another in as short a distance as possible?

Patrick82 once soldered the contacts/speaker posts/whatever of a source directly to the corresponding parts on an amp, IIRC.

I think the words he used was "hella speed".

 

[olblueyez]

Cables are more than one percent. There is only one kind of experience I know of that counts, actual use.

 

[linuxworks]

which vendors was it, was it benchmark or bel canto - someone was writing in their ad that 'cables don't matter with our box' (or to that effect) saying that they had such a low-z output (don't they all, though?) so that cable issues were not relevant (for phones out).

I do believe that, too. a good low-z source renders cables essentially irrelevant.

I blame the source, always; and never the cables. we're NOT talking microwave rf here, guys. audio is 'easy'.

 

[Uncle Erik]

Quote:

Originally Posted by linuxworks /img/forum/go_quote.gif ...we're NOT talking microwave rf here, guys. audio is 'easy'.

Which is precisely the problem.

Real advancement and development in audio died off a couple decades ago. But how do you keep a moribund industry alive?

What you do is turn it into a fashion parade with lots of pricey status symbols. It doesn't matter if cables "work" or not as long as they confer status on the buyer and look cool.

You'll find that most audio gear falls into this category. You'll notice that 99% of the gear out there is not designed or marketed towards those with a technical understanding of it. It's all hype and buzzwords designed to sell to those who don't understand - or want to understand - or even a pretense of wanting to understand - what goes on inside the box. The manufacturers know this. They carefully dodge anyone wanting to know why a tube on a PCB costs $5,000.

 

[Bullseye]

Quote:

Originally Posted by olblueyez /img/forum/go_quote.gif Occasional amp, source, and headphone changes caused by cable limitations is common place on this website. People just seem to cut off their noses to spite their faces because they just cant seem to get their heads around the fact that cables can allow detail, dynamics, warmth, impact, weight, pass through unaltered as compared to the rat shack stuff. Im not telling anyone they "ADD" anything but allow your equipment to perform at its best. I think that is one of the biggest misconceptions about cables and why people don't understand when someone like me says "That silver cable is bright" its merely how it passes the signal. I feel sorry for all the people who spend thousands on equipment and use crappy stranded, poorly shielded cables to bind it all together, its a shame because it is a huge driving force in the equipment merry go round so many Head-Fi members are on. Same with tubes, people don't spend enough time finding the right tubes and then they write reviews on tube amps telling everyone about the sound signature when it should be common knowledge a tube amp with a good number of tube rolling options can sound like many different amps. Another tragic circumstance is when some non-believers spend a lot of time influencing new members not to try things that may be extremely important to some of those people had they not been told not to bother. I know it works both ways, but I think we should not try to limit some else's thinking before they even get started. Disclaimer: I don't advocate getting 300 dollar interconnects when your source is an Ipod. I think a good place to start without the benefit of experimentation is 10 percent of your system value for cables.

Just to remind you olblueyez, (first of all), that this thread is for "non believers" to say if they are happy with their equipment.

After the reminder, just telling you that your whole response is nonsense. Sorry if it sounds harsh or not, but I just have to say it loud and clear. The first paragraph is quite laughable. And to add, the thing I marked in red, can you GIVE PROOF of it? Subjective opinions are not PROOF. If you think, just for one second, what is the best way to prove that assortment you should imagine that using a some equipment that can measure sound waves directly from the source's output, and on the output after the cable is used, something in those measures has to be missing (in the audible frequencies, as the rest of the frequencies can not be heard by us)

The getting back again to the first paragraph, what is that thing about "cables can allow [blah, blah] to pass unaltered?" Then what, are "cheap" cables racist with the electrons? Do they say "hey you, stop running so fast, go slower hence the bass changes?" It is total nonsense! Seriously man, I am trying to stay calm with what you have written there, but it is hard to...

I feel sorry for the people who change cables in lets say their speaker system, thinking that the SQ will change, instead of making a study of the acoustics of the listening room, and changing what is needed in the audible frequencies. After they have done that, if they want FANCY LOOKING CABLES and have the money for it, then go ahead.

Don't know why I am trying to reason with you here, my attempt will fail and you will think I am attacking you (as other member pointed out), which is not the case.

 

[Bullseye]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uncle Erik /img/forum/go_quote.gif Which is precisely the problem. Real advancement and development in audio died off a couple decades ago. But how do you keep a moribund industry alive? What you do is turn it into a fashion parade with lots of pricey status symbols. It doesn't matter if cables "work" or not as long as they confer status on the buyer and look cool. You'll find that most audio gear falls into this category. You'll notice that 99% of the gear out there is not designed or marketed towards those with a technical understanding of it. It's all hype and buzzwords designed to sell to those who don't understand - or want to understand - or even a pretense of wanting to understand - what goes on inside the box. The manufacturers know this. They carefully dodge anyone wanting to know why a tube on a PCB costs $5,000.

Have to second that. And have to add that I like your thinking Uncle Erik.

 

[Zanth]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheAttorney /img/forum/go_quote.gif It But then I go round to friends houses with "lesser" systems that they are seemingly satisfied with. And I can't stand it. I'd rather listen to the transistor radio than an underperforming hifi.

Wow, I thought I was the only one! This is such an odd quandary for me as well. Why is it that an underperforming systme is so utterly dissatisfying but a transistor radio isn't? Expectations. With a transistor radio (or the TV, car radio etc) I'm zoned in on the music and I have no expectation that the sound will be anything but adequate. Yet, when I am building an audio system (or listening to a friend's) then there has been time, money and energy spent in building it, with (my assumption) passion and an expectation that it will sound 1) good to great and 2) better than mediocre systems. When it doesn't it lets one down, or at least lets me down.

This is one reason that I held off getting speakers (the other being space/finances and little kids sticking hands where they shouldn't).

I wanted to be sure that what I bought was what I wanted. The upgrade cycle with headphones in manageable because of the cost and size of the units, but dealing with the same pathway regarding speakers would have my nerves twisted. Both from my OCD tendencies and with my wife nagging me to just stop already

 

[olblueyez]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bullseye /img/forum/go_quote.gif Just to remind you olblueyez, (first of all), that this thread is for "non believers" to say if they are happy with their equipment. After the reminder, just telling you that your whole response is nonsense. Sorry if it sounds harsh or not, but I just have to say it loud and clear. The first paragraph is quite laughable. And to add, the thing I marked in red, can you GIVE PROOF of it? Subjective opinions are not PROOF. If you think, just for one second, what is the best way to prove that assortment you should imagine that using a some equipment that can measure sound waves directly from the source's output, and on the output after the cable is used, something in those measures has to be missing (in the audible frequencies, as the rest of the frequencies can not be heard by us) The getting back again to the first paragraph, what is that thing about "cables can allow [blah, blah] to pass unaltered?" Then what, are "cheap" cables racist with the electrons? Do they say "hey you, stop running so fast, go slower hence the bass changes?" It is total nonsense! Seriously man, I am trying to stay calm with what you have written there, but it is hard to... I feel sorry for the people who change cables in lets say their speaker system, thinking that the SQ will change, instead of making a study of the acoustics of the listening room, and changing what is needed in the audible frequencies. After they have done that, if they want FANCY LOOKING CABLES and have the money for it, then go ahead. Don't know why I am trying to reason with you here, my attempt will fail and you will think I am attacking you (as other member pointed out), which is not the case.

My main thrust of my post is to say that I feel sorry for people who like you. The thread after all is about cables and now it has been reduced to speaking of racist electrons and fancy looking cables. I know it would be impossible for you to believe that there is a reason you don't hear a difference, but you speak of this subject like you know what everyone hears with the many different systems they have. If all of you tried some nicer cables then some of you would realize I am not the enemy but someone who has completely enjoyed the improvements in sound quality that good cables can make, and I want other people to experience this as well. They are part of why I am completely satisfied with my system and have no plans on changing my system for years to come.

I also need to say that there are a lot of cheating non-believers on head-fi such as Uncle-Erik who use something like BJC and not the 3 dollar equivalent from Radio shack. Erik's logic dictates that if sound is coming out the other end then it is working, so why buy a one BJC when you could have ten radio shack cables. I also don't understand how some of you can have a complete disregard for shielding.

Here is an RCA to RCA single for 57 cents, you guys can buy 2 for $1.14. If you truly don't believe then why not use something like this?

6' RCA CABLE

Please do me a favor, don't reply to my post and further derail this thread more than I have already. Just consider what I write and know I write it because I believe some of you could take your systems out of the "No" column and add them to the "yes" column.

 

[slindeman]

Interesting thread, with great comments.

What I want to know is this: do non-believers seek for the flattest measuring headphones in their price range or do they let subjectivity take over in headphone choice. Do any non-believers use Grados?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Publius /img/forum/go_quote.gif We all are in this hobby because of the enjoyment we get out of listening to music, but that does not mean enjoyment is a good metric for comparing equipment.

I couldn't disagree more with any statement I've read on Head-fi.org since June 2001.

My epiphany came in 2002 when I wasn't enjoying music on my $800 flat-measuring system (HD580/Corda/Cambridge Audio CD Player) as much as on my $50 bass-boosted portable cd player with Sony Sport headphones. From then on, enjoyment became my only metric for audio equipment. I've gone through a lot of equipment, including 31 headphones, 13 amps, 10 cables, and 5 sources, most of them budget-mid level.

My system now measures poorly (DAC 3dB down at 20kHz, tube amp with plenty of distortion, Grado headphones), and yet I have never enjoyed music more in my life. I haven't changed anything in my system since 2005. I've hardly been around here, other than to check the music forum. I've been listening to music on headphones for 25 years, and yet my music collection has grown 400% in the last 4 years. Anyway, that's my story, for whatever it is worth (probably not much).

 

[ILikeMusic]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uncle Erik /img/forum/go_quote.gif Real advancement and development in audio died off a couple decades ago. But how do you keep a moribund industry alive? What you do is turn it into a fashion parade with lots of pricey status symbols. It doesn't matter if cables "work" or not as long as they confer status on the buyer and look cool. You'll find that most audio gear falls into this category. You'll notice that 99% of the gear out there is not designed or marketed towards those with a technical understanding of it. It's all hype and buzzwords designed to sell to those who don't understand - or want to understand - or even a pretense of wanting to understand - what goes on inside the box. The manufacturers know this. They carefully dodge anyone wanting to know why a tube on a PCB costs $5,000.

You nailed it.

Those of us 'of a certain age' remember analog audio and the time when there really were significant differences between one component and another. In the current era with everyday specs of 90+ dB SNR, 20-22kHz +/- 0.1 dB, 0.001% THD, and zero wow/flutter (things that we couldn't achieve at any price in the old days) people are left to try to imagine minute differences in a host of sources that in reality are virtually identical... and so they do, for the reasons you describe so well above. It's a real chuckle sometimes.

.

 

[mark_h]

I tweak, I'm a tweaker!

 

[linuxworks]

Quote:

Originally Posted by olblueyez /img/forum/go_quote.gif Here is an RCA to RCA single for 57 cents, you guys can buy 2 for $1.14. If you truly don't believe then why not use something like this? 6' RCA CABLE

that's a perfectly FINE cable for digital audio.

in fact, its often better than the stuff I use

my bits still get there. not once has a bit stopped to ask me for directions

 

[linuxworks]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bullseye /img/forum/go_quote.gif Have to second that. And have to add that I like your thinking Uncle Erik.

I'll 3rd it, if that works.