Cable Cost vs Equipment Cost
- Thread starter TreAdidas
- Start date
CRESCENDOPOWER
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2004
- Posts
- 2,581
- Likes
- 10
I don't care what cable you use on the DAC-1 it still isn't as good as a $3000 CD player, and anyone who thinks otherwise is delusional. Go over to Audio Asylum, and spread your ignorance, and see what they have to say. The quality of digital does not stop at $975.00, and anyone who thinks that hasn’t listened to anything better, but I sure bet they found time to read glorious reviews of the products they own.
Febs
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2005
- Posts
- 2,853
- Likes
- 12
Quote:
Just out of curiosity, did you slap yourself when you wrote this sentence?
| Originally Posted by CRESCENDOPOWER /img/forum/go_quote.gif People’s preferences, system, and ears are all different, and anyone who mentions the DAC 1 in same sentence as Mark Levinson should be slapped. |
Just out of curiosity, did you slap yourself when you wrote this sentence?
CRESCENDOPOWER
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2004
- Posts
- 2,581
- Likes
- 10
Quote:
Why should I when I am correct? I can't help the fact that this board has gone to pot in the last 3, or 4 years.
| Originally Posted by Febs /img/forum/go_quote.gif Just out of curiosity, did you slap yourself when you wrote this sentence? |
Why should I when I am correct? I can't help the fact that this board has gone to pot in the last 3, or 4 years.
Febs
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2005
- Posts
- 2,853
- Likes
- 12
It was a joke.
Looks like someone missed snack time.
Looks like someone missed snack time.
CRESCENDOPOWER
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2004
- Posts
- 2,581
- Likes
- 10
Quote:
Please use a smiley next time.
| Originally Posted by Febs /img/forum/go_quote.gif It was a joke. Looks like someone missed snack time. |
Please use a smiley next time.
CRESCENDOPOWER
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2004
- Posts
- 2,581
- Likes
- 10
Quote:
I have been known to do these things in the past. Just think of it as the voice of reason.
| Originally Posted by televators /img/forum/go_quote.gif did you change you profile and avatar because of this thread 
|
I have been known to do these things in the past. Just think of it as the voice of reason.
CRESCENDOPOWER
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2004
- Posts
- 2,581
- Likes
- 10
Quote:
I don't have a lot of experience with DACs in that price range. It will simply come down to what DAC fits best within your system, and that may be the DAC1, or not depending upon what you are looking for. And, before you ask, yes I have heard the DAC1, and it is not a giant killer.
| Originally Posted by televators /img/forum/go_quote.gif thread derailer : So is there a DAC under $1k you would recommend over the DAC1? |
I don't have a lot of experience with DACs in that price range. It will simply come down to what DAC fits best within your system, and that may be the DAC1, or not depending upon what you are looking for. And, before you ask, yes I have heard the DAC1, and it is not a giant killer.
Black Stuart
MOT: Deep Sound Cables
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2006
- Posts
- 379
- Likes
- 13
Televators and lowmagnet,
have expressed a simple rational requirement for signal cables - that they should convey as much of the original signal detail as possible from source to h/phones/speakers. If you argue against that, that's your problem.
I thought televators comments about Nordost should be taken onboard by many. He found they allowed more of a neutral sound to be conveyed.
I can't agree with the thread title about spend because I don't buy commercial cables, I build my own using superb ex. US mil. spec. wire.
Surely there are two very important facts that need to be grasped about signal cables - quality of the conductor/s material and dialectric.
Sticking with Nordost, they have a reputation for producing neutral sounding cables, they also have a reputation for being open about the construction of their cables - there is no snake oil there.
There simply is no substitute for using the purest forms of silver or copper - the less crystals there are in the conductors the straighter and quicker the signal will flow, dialectric employed plays a significant part in this as well.
Nordost Valhalla uses 4 runs of very high purity silver/plated copper per signal and return, in straight runs and creates via a proprietory dialectric, virtually an 'air dialectric' (the best dialectric of all). They also now use (I believe) Silver Eichmans for connectors.These I/Cs are hugely expensive but their are many who swear by them.
I have no doubt that they are very, very neutral and will allow a 'truer' experience of the original recording. As with most quality hi-fi products they wil also ruthlessly expose any shortcomings in your system.
I am about to create Valhalla clones for digital and something very different for analogue, at a fraction of the cost.
So, for me it is'nt a case of the relationship of spend on cables v equipment but which cables I create to use with my equipment.
Cables don't make a difference? no of course not - hey did you see that flying pig WOW.
have expressed a simple rational requirement for signal cables - that they should convey as much of the original signal detail as possible from source to h/phones/speakers. If you argue against that, that's your problem.
I thought televators comments about Nordost should be taken onboard by many. He found they allowed more of a neutral sound to be conveyed.
I can't agree with the thread title about spend because I don't buy commercial cables, I build my own using superb ex. US mil. spec. wire.
Surely there are two very important facts that need to be grasped about signal cables - quality of the conductor/s material and dialectric.
Sticking with Nordost, they have a reputation for producing neutral sounding cables, they also have a reputation for being open about the construction of their cables - there is no snake oil there.
There simply is no substitute for using the purest forms of silver or copper - the less crystals there are in the conductors the straighter and quicker the signal will flow, dialectric employed plays a significant part in this as well.
Nordost Valhalla uses 4 runs of very high purity silver/plated copper per signal and return, in straight runs and creates via a proprietory dialectric, virtually an 'air dialectric' (the best dialectric of all). They also now use (I believe) Silver Eichmans for connectors.These I/Cs are hugely expensive but their are many who swear by them.
I have no doubt that they are very, very neutral and will allow a 'truer' experience of the original recording. As with most quality hi-fi products they wil also ruthlessly expose any shortcomings in your system.
I am about to create Valhalla clones for digital and something very different for analogue, at a fraction of the cost.
So, for me it is'nt a case of the relationship of spend on cables v equipment but which cables I create to use with my equipment.
Cables don't make a difference? no of course not - hey did you see that flying pig WOW.
tourmaline
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2003
- Posts
- 3,114
- Likes
- 16
Quote:
Stuart is right about Nordost cables. I happen to own some Nordost cables and agree with the people say about em. they are really that good. The higher you go up the ladder, the more body and musicallity you get. The speed and transparency is a mark of the complete line. Higher up the ladder you will also gain some more micro details.
The cable is that revealing that it isn't everybody's cup of tea. It let you hear exactly what a component does it is attached to. So, it a good cable for good equipment, if you wanna correct a flaw in your system, you'd better look elsewhere!
I am very curious of Stuarts new cables, i wonder how close he can get to the original cables! The hard thing is to get the braided teflon and the air dielectric, wich is expensive to make, hence the high price for the cables.
As for cables and related to price, i bought expensive cables and never regreted spending that money, they are that much better then the cables i had before. But i have to say that some of the cables Stuart is using is also some high quality stuff. You can get close to the originals for a fraction of the cost, but in case of the nordost cables, they lack a bit of that magic. There's just some magic in the reference series, as patrick also intensilly described in his threads.
It seems silverplated copper is the best material for the best cables. Plain copper is missing just that extra bite in the extreem high end.
Just my thought of extensive experimenting and listening to cheap and expensive cables.
| Originally Posted by Black Stuart /img/forum/go_quote.gif Televators and lowmagnet, have expressed a simple rational requirement for signal cables - that they should convey as much of the original signal detail as possible from source to h/phones/speakers. If you argue against that, that's your problem. I thought televators comments about Nordost should be taken onboard by many. He found they allowed more of a neutral sound to be conveyed. I can't agree with the thread title about spend because I don't buy commercial cables, I build my own using superb ex. US mil. spec. wire. Surely there are two very important facts that need to be grasped about signal cables - quality of the conductor/s material and dialectric. Sticking with Nordost, they have a reputation for producing neutral sounding cables, they also have a reputation for being open about the construction of their cables - there is no snake oil there. There simply is no substitute for using the purest forms of silver or copper - the less crystals there are in the conductors the straighter and quicker the signal will flow, dialectric employed plays a significant part in this as well. Nordost Valhalla uses 4 runs of very high purity silver/plated copper per signal and return, in straight runs and creates via a proprietory dialectric, virtually an 'air dialectric' (the best dialectric of all). They also now use (I believe) Silver Eichmans for connectors.These I/Cs are hugely expensive but their are many who swear by them. I have no doubt that they are very, very neutral and will allow a 'truer' experience of the original recording. As with most quality hi-fi products they wil also ruthlessly expose any shortcomings in your system. I am about to create Valhalla clones for digital and something very different for analogue, at a fraction of the cost. So, for me it is'nt a case of the relationship of spend on cables v equipment but which cables I create to use with my equipment. Cables don't make a difference? no of course not - hey did you see that flying pig WOW. |
Stuart is right about Nordost cables. I happen to own some Nordost cables and agree with the people say about em. they are really that good. The higher you go up the ladder, the more body and musicallity you get. The speed and transparency is a mark of the complete line. Higher up the ladder you will also gain some more micro details.
The cable is that revealing that it isn't everybody's cup of tea. It let you hear exactly what a component does it is attached to. So, it a good cable for good equipment, if you wanna correct a flaw in your system, you'd better look elsewhere!
I am very curious of Stuarts new cables, i wonder how close he can get to the original cables! The hard thing is to get the braided teflon and the air dielectric, wich is expensive to make, hence the high price for the cables.
As for cables and related to price, i bought expensive cables and never regreted spending that money, they are that much better then the cables i had before. But i have to say that some of the cables Stuart is using is also some high quality stuff. You can get close to the originals for a fraction of the cost, but in case of the nordost cables, they lack a bit of that magic. There's just some magic in the reference series, as patrick also intensilly described in his threads.
It seems silverplated copper is the best material for the best cables. Plain copper is missing just that extra bite in the extreem high end.
Just my thought of extensive experimenting and listening to cheap and expensive cables.
lowmagnet
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2006
- Posts
- 343
- Likes
- 13
Quote:
In silver is a better conductor than copper is. Lower impedance is generally a good thing, since it leads to better damping. Silver is rather expensive at (currently) $13-14 per ounce in bullion value. Copper trades as a commodity at $0.12 per ounce. So if a decent OFC IC goes for 15-20 dollars, the silver equivalent is justified in costing 150-200, I suppose.
I'm sure there's a way to count up the weight and/or mass of a conductor, but I'm much too lazy to do the math at the moment
| Originally Posted by tourmaline /img/forum/go_quote.gif It seems silverplated copper is the best material for the best cables. Plain copper is missing just that extra bite in the extreem high end. |
In silver is a better conductor than copper is. Lower impedance is generally a good thing, since it leads to better damping. Silver is rather expensive at (currently) $13-14 per ounce in bullion value. Copper trades as a commodity at $0.12 per ounce. So if a decent OFC IC goes for 15-20 dollars, the silver equivalent is justified in costing 150-200, I suppose.
I'm sure there's a way to count up the weight and/or mass of a conductor, but I'm much too lazy to do the math at the moment
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2003
- Posts
- 4,296
- Likes
- 2,947
Quote:
No, not at all, since raw material cost - especially the wire - is typically only a small portion of the total cost required to build a cable.
| Originally Posted by lowmagnet /img/forum/go_quote.gif Silver is rather expensive at (currently) $13-14 per ounce in bullion value. Copper trades as a commodity at $0.12 per ounce. So if a decent OFC IC goes for 15-20 dollars, the silver equivalent is justified in costing 150-200, I suppose. |
No, not at all, since raw material cost - especially the wire - is typically only a small portion of the total cost required to build a cable.
lowmagnet
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2006
- Posts
- 343
- Likes
- 13
Quote:
The argument of copper cost vs silver cost was of course an 'all-else-equal' statement on my part. If all else is equal in the design, I would not expect an silver conductor cable to cost more than the relative difference in raw materials cost.
| Originally Posted by mulveling /img/forum/go_quote.gif No, not at all, since raw material cost - especially the wire - is typically only a small portion of the total cost required to build a cable. |
The argument of copper cost vs silver cost was of course an 'all-else-equal' statement on my part. If all else is equal in the design, I would not expect an silver conductor cable to cost more than the relative difference in raw materials cost.
Users who are viewing this thread
