[ethebull]

I’ve been around audio for a few decades. Worked in and managed a mid-high end audio/video store for over 10 years. My experiences and perspective might have some value in this discussion.

About midway into my tenure in the audio biz, the company I worked for brought in a new boutique cable vendor. We were big MonsterCable dealers and this new brand was positioned to be the step-up line for our best systems. To promote the line, “BCV” offered a one time special accommodation deal to all the sales people in our company - 85% off of retail. I had modest aftermarket wires and assorted stock and generic cables in my $15k stereo rig at the time, and though I would put myself in the skeptic camp, the chance to buy at 15 cents on the dollar was a no-brainer.

I bought $4000 worth for $600. Two runs of speaker wire for my bi-amped rig, Six IC’s, a coax, a power filter, and three power cords. The cables I bought were third from the top in this manufacture’s line - they offer $4000 8’ speaker cables.

Did it sound different from my old stuff? Yes. Did it sound better? Yes. Would I have spent $4k and have been satisfied? No, not personally, but I was pleased given my $600 investment. I had recently upgraded from a $500 preamp to one that sold for $2000. There was a modest fairly subtle gain in performance. I thought the cable upgrade was more noticeable. My wife’s comment was “All you changed was the cable?” She clearly heard the change for the better.

So what can anyone draw from my experience? Cables do sound different. The differences are not dramatic to my ears, but to those in the no differences at all camp, I can’t agree. As to various brands, their pricing and cost vs. performance, that’s up to each of us to decide.

 

[Riboge]

I can't resist one last comment:
This discussion is typically absurd:
Does anyone really doubt that cable prices are inflated beyond all reason? I totally believe I hear differences among various cables and that some higher end ones are better, but I would never either buy one new or for more than 50% of list. When you start getting to lists above $1500, then it should be less than 33%. This is my semi-boycott.

But this does not imply or mean that they are worth no more than RS or BJ cables a priori. It is where there is a difference but it is less than monumental and hard to define or measure that the possibility of this huge inflation exists as people obsessively seek better among "unique" offerings from multiple makers trying to distinguish themselves that are hard to compare or objectively evaluate. I don't believe WE would have driven and supported this escalation of price if there was NO difference to hear at all. Yet, again, who would doubt that this has lead to an inordinate disproportion between price and value and to more than a few offering lucrative but undeserving cables. And who could doubt that a lot of what cable makers say about their cables is baloney parading as filet mignon?

We should do whatever we can to get them to cut the crap and bring the prices into proportion. This does not, however, require us to call them frauds or claim their products are worthless. That is unfair and counterproductive.

 

[sacd lover]

Quote:

Originally Posted by colonelkernel8 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I once again have to say something here. Steve was saying that an iPod is able to hold its value even though it has moving parts increasing its likelihood of wearing out and breaking, whereas a cable, containing no moving parts, still loses 50% (I think that was the accepted number) of its value pretty much the moment it is bought.

Where does everyone come up with this 50% figure. After how long? Cars, boats, computers or whatever lose value the older and more used they become. At some point those items will sell for 10-20% of retail.

If I have a pair of IC's for ten years and sell them for 50% of the original price is that poor resale? Moreover, I did have a ten year old pair of MIT's I paid $105 for and sold for $75.

 

[OverlordXenu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sacd lover /img/forum/go_quote.gif Where does everyone come up with this 50% figure. After how long? Cars, boats, computers or whatever lose value the older and more used they become. At some point those items will sell for 10-20% of retail. If I have a pair of IC's for ten years and sell them for 50% of the original price is that poor resale? Moreover, I did have a ten year old pair of MIT's I paid $105 for and sold for $75.

Here.
Quote:

Originally Posted by yotacowboy /img/forum/go_quote.gif Cause they're not heirlooms or artifacts? My car lost value the second I drove it off the lot. My computer lost value the second it was delivered on my doorstep. My pants lost value the second I wore them. Should I go on? Losing 40-50% value on a used market is not uncommon, and nor is it any indication of how much snake oil was used in the construction of an audio cable... Sorry, you were waiting for somebody to say, "CAUSE THEY'RE FREAKIN' SNAKE OIL!!!"?

 

[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by yotacowboy /img/forum/go_quote.gif I see. Moving parts makes something valuable.

Thanks for your valuable contribution to this conversation. When you want to actually discuss what I'm talking about let me know.

See ya
Steve

 

[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riboge /img/forum/go_quote.gif Yet it may be that I will once again withdraw along with so many others and Head Fi will be left with what it deserves.

Endeavor to prevent the portal of egress from impacting your posterior as you turn to bid your fond adieu.

See ya
Steve

 

[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sacd lover /img/forum/go_quote.gif Computers? .... nothing loses value faster than a desk top computer.

The point is that cables lose a great deal of value when you resell them. A computer is replaced yearly by a MUCH more powerful model for less money. Cables don't become obsolete. A good cable should be a good cable yesterday, today and forever.

See ya
Steve

 

[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by colonelkernel8 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I once again have to say something here. Steve was saying that an iPod is able to hold its value even though it has moving parts increasing its likelihood of wearing out and breaking, whereas a cable, containing no moving parts, still loses 50% (I think that was the accepted number) of its value pretty much the moment it is bought.

The reason an iPod holds its value better is because it is in demand because it serves its purpose spectacularly. An expensive wire is an expensive wire.

See ya
Steve

 

[sacd lover]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot /img/forum/go_quote.gif The point is that cables lose a great deal of value when you resell them. A computer is replaced yearly by a MUCH more powerful model for less money. Cables don't become obsolete. A good cable should be a good cable yesterday, today and forever. See ya Steve

No more than any other audio component, especially amps and cd players .... and the % of the $ lost seems to be the issue here.

I do better getting more of the purchase price out of cables than I do most electronics. Why? Cables don't become obsolete. A good cable should be a good cable yesterday, today and forever. But electronics wear out.

 

[monolith]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sacd lover /img/forum/go_quote.gif No more than any other audio component, especially amps and cd players .... and the % of the $ lost seems to be the issue here. I do better getting more of the purchase price out of cables than I do most electronics. Why? Cables don't become obsolete. A good cable should be a good cable yesterday, today and forever. But electronics wear out.

I like how the two of you are using exactly the same fact to make exactly opposite points.

 

[sacd lover]

Quote:

Originally Posted by monolith /img/forum/go_quote.gif I like how the two of you are using exactly the same fact to make exactly opposite points.

Sometimes people think in only one direction and miss seeing that there is often a completely opposite interpretation to their statements.

 

[bigshot]

A cable *should* retain its resale value, but it doesn't. See 353.

See ya
Steve

 

[monolith]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sacd lover /img/forum/go_quote.gif Sometimes people think in only one direction and miss seeing that there is often a completely opposite interpretation to their statements.

That's true, but not applicable here.

 

[yotacowboy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot /img/forum/go_quote.gif A cable *should* retain its resale value, but it doesn't. See 353. See ya Steve

So should my Enron stock...

Again, you're making assumptions based on a limited understanding... if you want an "intellectually honest" evaluation of your general position, it is the Hasty Generalization...


High material costs do not necessarily make a "good" cable.

Resale value is not determined solely by the material cost or complexity of a piece of audio equipment. Likewise, the sheer complexity of something may not be an indication of it's quality, or how it sounds.

of course, YMMV!

 

[tomjtx]

IME brand new cable sells at a minimum 30% discount and it is not that hard to get 40-50% off.

Used cable sells at a much greater than 50% off IME.

Of course, one has to be a savvy consumer, which some would argue is not a charecteristic of cable devotees

Or audiophiles in general

and, please, before you flame, I am dissing myself as well