Do you really hear differences in cables?

[KZEE]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnFerrier I'm aware that in the late 80's Bob Carver challenged the editors of Stereophile magazine that he could match the sound of their favorite amplifier. They took him up on this. This has been referred to as something like the "Carver Audio Shootout"--it was kind of famous. Bob analyzed the transfer characteristics of their $10,000+ Conrad-Johnson (sp?) tube mono-blocks, and went to Radio Shack and purchased a small handful of parts. He modified his ~$400 solid state amplifer and they could *not* hear a difference in a blind test. The model of amplifier was 1.5, if people wished to have the same tube sound that fooled the editors of Stereophile magazine, they could purchase the 1.5T. Internally, this was known as the Carver Tweak...that amounted to a couple of resistors and a couple of capacitors.JF

If there really were no differences between the sound of the Carver 1.5 and a $10,000 Conrad-Johnson, I would think that Carver would literally have sold millions of those amps. As far as I know that isn't the case, and I would supect it's because in the real world, the Carver and the $10,000 C-J in fact sound nothing alike. It's also been my experience that with most amplifiers, you get what you pay for.

 

[JohnFerrier]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilS We seem to be like two ships passing in the night. If two amps both measure at the same amount of THD (let's say for the sake of argument .01%), would that mean that they could not sound differently? If amps sound differently because of "upper frequency harmonic distortion," would they measure differently? What would the magnitude of the difference have to be, in terms of measurements, for it to be audible?

Phil,

A THD figure of say 0.01% actually says very little. I will point out that that headphones actually uses a figure like this, say 0.1% THD. However, it doesn't indicate at which frequency that this value was determined. A more meaningful number is say for an amplifier maximum THD is 0.01% (20-20khz). In this case, a person knows that the worst case distortion is 0.01% over the full audible bandwidth. However, what about the profile of the distortion? What is the ratio of distortion at 10khz to the distortion at 1khz (distortion increases with frequency). I read about this from an engineer at Philips Electronics: Bruno Putzeys.

So, when you write that two amplifiers that have a distortion of 0.01%, it doesn't anything about the distortion profile. The components of the distortion can vary widely from design to design. Another way, what ever is 0.01% wrong may be mostly a 2nd order harmonic in one amplifer and in another amplifier it is the 5th order harmonic. Current thinking is that 2nd order distortion is *much* more pleasing than something like 5th order harmonics. Even harmonics are considered better than odd order harmonics. You see it gets more complex. Wires and cables *do not* have odd or even harmonic distortion.

The above is just a doodle of what goes on with amplifiers. There is no reason for me to delve into this further. My only hope is that you can see that amplifers are complex. Look inside yours. Would it help to see a schematic? There are numerous different components that contribute noise and distortion.

Cables have immeasureable noise and immeasureable distortion (20-20khz).

If you really need to understand better, try doing a Google search. If you happen to find a DBT or an ABX test that indicates that people hear difference in cables post a link. I hope, by then, that I've forgotten about this thread though.

Is anyone from Cleveland reading this? If so, please see the following...
http://www6.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=94488


JF

 

[rhfactor]

Quote:

Originally Posted by KZEE Does the Zu color the sound, or does it in fact more accurately pass the amplifier's original signal through to the speakers?

It must color the sound, otherwise people wouldn't be hearing a difference. Either that or the difference is entirely psychosomatic. The stock cable is enough to accurately reproduce the signal in all characteristics that can be detected audibly. (To borrow from rodbac earlier, this is something that is mindbogglingly trivial.) Again, I invoke the concept of a JND. Any difference in frequency response BELOW the JND cannot be heard by average human ears. I have not seen a frequency response curve for a Zu Mobius but one of two things is possible. (1) It is constructed to transmit the signal without altering the sound and it produces a flat (within the margin of error given by the JND) frequency response curve as expected. (2) It is constructed in some abnormal fashion which produces a non-flat (i.e., peaks/valleys above JND) frequency response curve. I believe either of these is equally possible. And if (2) is true and you LIKE the coloration produced by the Zu in that case, I don't think you are silly. I just think you are silly to claim it is more accurately passing the signal.
Quote:

I'm sceptical that you have anywhere near the experience with high-end audio gear that the majority of the participants of this web sight do.

I freely admit that I don't have the experience with listening to expensive audio gear that many of the participants of the website do. Luckily this doesn't detract from my ability to read scientific literature!

And I feel that if anything, an investment in expensive hardware *appears* to cloud one's ability to make judgements as to its merit.
Quote:

So how about it - would you care to share with us the specific types/brands of amps, speakers, sources and cabling that you've had personal experience with? And how about the the other measurement/ABT naysayers out there... care to let us in on the hi-rez gear that you own/have had experience with? Because IMO, if it ain't hi-rez, you ain't going to hear the effects that cabling has on the sound that comes out of your speakers and or headphones (which are really just speakers that are little).

What would be acceptably "high-end" or "high-resolution" audio equipment? Is it something with less than 1% THD? Is it something that costs over $1000? Is it something that comes from a specific brand name? My opinion is that I could never answer this question satisfactorily -- there would always be someone who had spent a dollar more, someone who had tested one more cable, someone who had one more pair of headphones, someone who tested on a warm day, someone who tested when the tide was out, etc. And I am then told that only THEN do the clear differences reveal themselves.

 

[rhfactor]

Quote:

Originally Posted by KZEE If there really were no differences between the sound of the Carver 1.5 and a $10,000 Conrad-Johnson, I would think that Carver would literally have sold millions of those amps. As far as I know that isn't the case, and I would supect it's because in the real world, the Carver and the $10,000 C-J in fact sound nothing alike.

Ah, you forget that we believe that there are no differences between the sound of 12awg zipcord and $750/ft cryo-treated silver dipped in snake oil under a full moon on the eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month. Yet people still buy the latter, so it's very easy for us to believe that few people would buy the former.
Quote:

It's also been my experience that with most amplifiers, you get what you pay for.

It's been my experience that as with everything in life, the law of diminishing returns applies. At some point the returns diminish to inaudibility.

 

[PhilS]

JF, your explanation was helpful. Thanks.

 

[Jorg]

I've post it a while ago but there was no attention to it. I'll post again:

why not use superconductivity instead of very expensive silver cables like 1000$/ft??? It's much cheaper (100$/ft max) and it will do NOTHING to the signal. Current can travel in a superconductive circuit for years without any change (!!!!!!!!!!!) while in silver/copper it goes to zero in few nanoseconds.

BTW I havn't decided yet if I believe that cable makes a difference or not. Two years ago I've done an A/B (not blind) between Nordos Solar Wind 100$/meter 0.6 m IC and 0.3$/meter 10 m long (!!!) IC. My setup was EgoSys Waveterminal 2496 soundcard -> Grado RA-1 -> stock cabled HD600. All these components deserve each other and the system was very well balanced. 2496 is a very good soundcard and I say it owning a sub 4000$ CDP. I couldn't hear the difference between those two ICs. There were several possibilities:

1) Those two didn't make a difference. The obvious answer for every "non-believer" but I can't be sure.
2) I can't hear the difference because my ears are demaged. Not likely because I clearly hear difference between headphones and sources.
3) The resolution of the system wasn't enough to determine the change in the ICs. It is the obvious answer for all "believers" and again I can't be sure.

BTW one suggestion for believers who own some very good ICs (>100$/m retail) and a high-resolution headphone system. Buy a very cheap and very long IC and connect one channel to the expensive one and the other to a cheap one. Please tell us the differences (not subtle) that you hear if any. I can't do the comparison now because I already sold most of my Hi-End equipment.

Again, I'm not on the either side and just looking for truth.

And don't forget about superconductivity.

 

[PhilS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhfactor And I feel that if anything, an investment in expensive hardware *appears* to cloud one's ability to make judgements as to its merit.

Yes, and as we have learned from this thread, (1) the effect is so powerful that everyone on the planet earth, without exception, who has ever compared one properly-constructed cable to another and has heard a difference has fallen under this psychosis, (2) there is a similar effect that causes some who compare less expensive cables and more expensive cables to actually prefer the sound of the less expensive cables -- this might seem to cut against the "investment" explanation, but actually does not, as these folks subconsciously realize that choosing the more expensive cable could negatively impact their retirement planning, and so their subsconcious mind tricks them into preferring the less expensive cable (even though there is no difference in sound), and (3) it is good thing that some refuse to compare cables and make a judgment based on what they hear, as the mind-numbing effect of the psychosis is so powerful that no one can escape it, and therefore it is only because these stout souls refuse to obtain actual experience with cables that some are left unsullied and are able to freely extoll for the rest of us who have gone over to the other side the absolute truth of "should" be heard (and gosh darnit of what "must" be heard) based on what the science says.

 

[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnFerrier A more meaningful number is say for an amplifier maximum THD is 0.01% (20-20khz). In this case, a person knows that the worst case distortion is 0.01% over the full audible bandwidth. However, what about the profile of the distortion? ... So, when you write that two amplifiers that have a distortion of 0.01%, it doesn't anything about the distortion profile. The components of the distortion can vary widely from design to design. Another way, what ever is 0.01% wrong may be mostly a 2nd order harmonic in one amplifer and in another amplifier it is the 5th order harmonic. Current thinking is that 2nd order distortion is *much* more pleasing than something like 5th order harmonics. Even harmonics are considered better than odd order harmonics. You see it gets more complex. Wires and cables *do not* have odd or even harmonic distortion.

Indeed, individual distortion profiles could be a cause for individual sonic characteristics with amps -- but this hypothesis is far from being established, and such a low distortion level is considered inaudible by classic objectivists.
Quote:

Cables have immeasureable noise and immeasureable distortion (20-20khz).

Although I haven't measured myself (have you?), I don't think this is true. Harmonic distortion will certainly be lower than with electronic components, but if a distortion level classified as inaudible with amps is considered to be a possible source of colorations, the same could apply to cables. And the same could apply to other forms of distortion (e.g. phase distortion, which is a real and measurable phenomenon with cables).

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhfactor It must color the sound, otherwise people wouldn't be hearing a difference. Either that or the difference is entirely psychosomatic. The stock cable is enough to accurately reproduce the signal in all characteristics that can be detected audibly.

So you seem to be very familiar with the design of both cables. What design property is it that leads you to the conclusion that the Zu doesn't provide optimal conditions for the electrical signal, whereas the stock cable does?

Quote:

As to whether we know what signal characteristics are responsible for the sonic differences with amps, yes. Increased high frequency amplification = "bright". Increased mids = "detailed". Increased midbass = "hey Bob this sure is good" (to all the non-audiophiles out there). ... Amps have measurably different frequency responses given input, this is the "transfer characteristic" JF was referring to.

So have you measured any significant deviations from linearity with the transfer characteristic of amps? I don't believe that's the case, not with most modern solid-state amps.

Quote:

Carver was able to measure the frequency response of an amp and then modify his own amp to reproduce the sound. Thus the science of why amps sound differently is fairly well understood. Cables don't have measurably different frequency responses.

AFAIK Carver has tried to reconstruct different harmonic- and phase-distortion patterns, not (primarily) frequency-response characteristics. And he has tried to mimic tube amps. I don't think his experiments, however «successful» or spectacular they may have been or been displayed, have led to an established theory.

 

[JohnFerrier]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ Although I haven't measured myself (have you?), I don't think this is true.

No, I haven't. However, here are measurements taken with an Audio Precision System Two Cascade ("the latest and greatest" distortion analyzer)... What one sees at 1khz is the notch at the test frequency (generally this area is disregarded...areas of interest are multiples of 1khz...i.e. 2k, 3k, 4k, etc.).

"Cheap" cable

"Expensive" cable

image credits:Steve Eddy

These are interconnect cables. Since ICs are upstream of amplication, I expect that they would have more of an effect on sound. Regardless, *immeasurable* distortion (<120db). (With my setup, I estimate the threshold of audibility of someone with perfect ears to be about -100dB. You would also need to listen with no background noise, like an anechoic chamber...if you can begin to hear blood pulse through your body, then background noise is low enough.)

For more information:
The Story Behind the Cable THD Measurements: Debunking the Myth of Cable Distortion and Dielectric Biasing
http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/...surements.html
http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/...istortion.html

Highlights: "No distortion products even remotely attributable to the cable." "No news. No distortion."
"Distortion: Not only sine wave, but also extremely complex full-spectrum multitone testing (including signal sequences derived from actual music). There were NO differences between the cables tested."

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/...asurements.pdf
http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/...f/4_cables.pdf

Hey, "freebie" cables measure fine too, I see.

(I didn't know about this article until this morning, I had known about the THD measurements that Steve Eddy prepared. It was worth it to me, to hang with this thread to find this article...)

Don't knock stock cables. Copper and silver are *excellent* conductors of electrons.


JF

 

[Langrath]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jorg why not use superconductivity instead of very expensive silver cables like 1000$/ft??? It's much cheaper (100$/ft max) and it will do NOTHING to the signal. Current can travel in a superconductive circuit for years without any change (!!!!!!!!!!!) while in silver/copper it goes to zero in few nanoseconds.

Even if the idea is interesting, you must be a "believer" before you try it. Otherwise it doesn't make sense not to use standard cables. But of course. I understand what you mean. Namely, if you use expensive silver cables, you already are a believer.

Georg

 

[Jorg]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Langrath Namely, if you use expensive silver cables, you already are a believer.

Not necessarily. Just looking for that difference. Frankly, I want to join the team "believers". But I couldn't hear it when I was making A/B and this theme didn't get much of my attention after this test though I wasn't sure cables can't make any difference. I just figured that I better upgrade all other components before trying to find a difference between cheap and expensive cables.

 

[JaZZ]

Thanks for the graphs, John! They're fascinating. On first look the curves show no conspicuities. I guess the shivering curve is the noise floor. The interesting thing are the multiples of 1 kHz. And indeed, there are amplitudes in the curve: at 2 and 3 kHz both cables show a similar spike (could this be from the measuring device?). But then, at 5, 7, 11, 13 and 17 kHz the cheap cable shows some very small spikes which don't seem to be random noise products and which are missing with the expensive cable. They could be interpreted as harmonic distortion of 5th, 7th, 11th, 13th and 17th order. The 2nd and 3rd order harmonics are shared by both cables.

Now I'm not pretending harmonic distortion on this low level, -140 dB, is audible (although, you never know...). Nevertheless there's an indication that cables can behave slightly differently in terms of signal transfer properties and -- especially -- harmonic distortion. The question now is: why? And could this be an indication for audible differences?

 

[PhilS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jorg I just figured that I better upgrade all other components before trying to find a difference between cheap and expensive cables.

That makes a lot of sense IMO. I didn't hear the difference between cables and become one of the psychotic "believers" until I upgraded the rest of my system. BTW, I also found that silver interconnects (at least the ones I tried) did not fit well with the rest of my system. Thus, I sent them back (even though they were much more expensive than the cables I was replacing at that time).

 

[JohnFerrier]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ Thanks for the graphs, John! They're fascinating. On first look the curves show no conspicuities. I guess the shivering curve is the noise floor. The interesting thing are the multiples of 1 kHz. And indeed, there are amplitudes in the curve: at 2 and 3 kHz both cables show a similar spike (could this be from the measuring device?). But then, at 5, 7, 11, 13 and 17 kHz the cheap cable shows some very small spikes which don't seem to be random noise products and which are missing with the expensive cable. They could be interpreted as harmonic distortion of 5th, 7th, 11th, 13th and 17th order. The 2nd and 3rd order harmonics are shared by both cables. Now I'm not pretending harmonic distortion on this low level, -140 dB, is audible (although, you never know...). Nevertheless there's an indication that cables can behave slightly differently in terms of signal transfer properties and -- especially -- harmonic distortion. The question now is: why? And could this be an indication for audible differences?

JaZZ,

*Without* knowing which is which, how many times out of 25 do you expect that you could tell the difference between a stock cable and a Zu cable?

I actually conducted a ABX test with my wife and was shocked that she didn't detect the "audiophile" configuration. (This was when my mind was more open minded about this. Like others, I *want* to believe; however, conclude that a person can *only imagine the difference*.)


JF

 

[KZEE]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhfactor It must color the sound, otherwise people wouldn't be hearing a difference. Either that or the difference is entirely psychosomatic. The stock cable is enough to accurately reproduce What would be acceptably "high-end" or "high-resolution" audio equipment? Is it something with less than 1% THD? Is it something that costs over $1000? Is it something that comes from a specific brand name? My opinion is that I could never answer this question satisfactorily -- there would always be someone who had spent a dollar more, someone who had tested one more cable, someone who had one more pair of headphones, someone who tested on a warm day, someone who tested when the tide was out, etc. And I am then told that only THEN do the clear differences reveal themselves.

Oh come now, Mr. Rhfactor... you're purposely being evasive. The list of hi-end products that offer a modicum of resolution is not that long, and is not as disagreed upon as you would have us to believe. I've also found that the vast majority of Head-fiers are a friendly and sincere bunch, and your fears in regard to being able to answer the question satisfactorily ring hollow. What are you so afraid of, Mr. Rhfactor?
Measurements and theory aside, I maintain my contention that you've never owned and or heard a system possessing the resolution necessary to allow you to hear the differences that exist in speaker wires and internet connectors. So c'mon, be a sport, take a chance, and list the types/brands of gear that you've had experience with, and let the chips fall where they may.